News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Slack was hacked by ntucker on Friday March 27, 2015 @06:46PM (#9279537)
Yes, but we currently have 2.1 million users, so that's still no small burden. And don't forget that's only after you brute forced the passwords.
Re:Slack was hacked by kybernetikos on Saturday March 28, 2015 @12:03PM (#9281830)
It's not the security of the passwords I'm thinking about, it's whether or not you've really enhanced it much by obfuscating the relationship between password and username. I'm sure you've thought about this more than me, but I'm a bit skeptical, since if you have a lot of users, you probably have had to create systems to make the log in process extremely efficient. If all of your users wanted to log into your system within a 24hr period, could they? Maybe a week? If they could, then an attacker can attempt to log in with each username over the same period of time.
Re:Slack was hacked by kijin on Saturday March 28, 2015 @08:14AM (#9281253)
So you basically increased the cracker's workload by six orders of magnitude, which is equivalent to increasing bcrypt's work factor by 20. Cool!
Re:Slack was hacked by im2w1l on Saturday March 28, 2015 @10:55AM (#9281655)
If you increase bcrypt's workfactor then legitimate requests take longer.