The net is atwitter with discussion of Jeremi Gosney’s specially crafted machine with 25 GPUs that can test hundreds of billions of passwords per second using hashcat, a password cracking system. Password crackers like hashcat look at the cryptographic hashes of user passwords and repeatedly make guesses to try to find a password that works. 1Password has been designed to resist automated password cracking attempts exactly because we anticipated developments like this.
Don’t get freaked out by the numbers
First and foremost the reports of 348 billion passwords per second is specifically about passwords stored in the LM format used on Windows XP, exploiting the notorious design flaws and limitations LM hashes. (If you are still running Windows XP; and particularly if you are running NT, 2000 or 2003 domain controllers, please, please upgrade.) The hundreds of billions of passwords per second reached against those hashes does not mean that passwords stored in other formats can be cracked that quickly.
By the way, this isn’t the only important news about password security to come out this year’s excellent Passwords12 conference. I couldn’t quite make it there this year, but I will talk about other developments from it in coming weeks. Today, all eyes are on GPUs guessing billions of passwords per second.
Slow and Fast Hashing
Typically when a password is “stored” on a system that you log into it is not the password itself, but instead it is a cryptographic hash of the password. I’ve written about some of the ways that password can be hashed before. These can roughly be divided into two categories: slow hashes and fast hashes. Slow hashes are specifically designed to slow down the kinds of attacks we are discussing.
Your 1Password Master Password is processed using the slow hashing system known as PBKDF2. 1Password’s use of PBKDF2 and your use of a good Master Password keep your data resistant from password crackers such as John the Ripper and hashcat if you chose a good Master Password.
Defending against future threats
There are several lessons from this. Gosney’s work does reflect real innovation and a breakthrough, but it isn’t an unexpected breakthrough. People who keep an eye on these things – and we do keep an eye on these things – expected something like this within the next couple of years.
We need to design systems that work against plausible future threats, not just against current threats. This is what we have always tried to do with 1Password.
Lessons and actions
- Your 1Password Master Password and your 1Password data remain safe, we designed the Agile Keychain format from the beginning to resist crackers like this. But it is also important for people to select strong, memorable, Master Passwords.
- It is more important than ever to have unique passwords for each site and service. As password cracking gets easier, the risks of using the same password on multiple sites increases. This is because if password hashes are stolen from one site, attackers have a better chance of discovering the password from the hash. Once they have that, they can try the same password on other sites.
- When using 1Password’s Strong Password Generator, try to create passwords that are at least 20 characters long.
Back to the Future
I’ve talked (well even boasted, I suppose) about how our earlier design decisions are protecting 1Password users today. But we have to look at what design decisions we make today will do for 1Password users half a decade from now.
Gosney’s machine can also be used against slow hashes, including PBKDF2 passwords. You can read more (and see cool pictures) of the design of Grosney’s hashcatting machine in the conference presentation slides (PDF).
Furthermore PBKDF2 was not designed to specifically impair parallel processing. But because GPUs have unusual and restricted ways of addressing memory, it is possible to design systems that make parallel processing using GPUs slower. This leaves a number of questions that we continue to look at.
- Do we need to change anything at all in anticipation of even more powerful machines tuned toward PBKDF2? (We don’t yet have estimates on how many passwords per second this system could try against a 1Password data file.)
- If we do need to change things, when do we need those changes need to be in place?
- Should we look at more parallel and GPU resistant alternatives to PBKDF2, such as scrypt?
- Should we look at tinkering with options within PBKDF2 to make it more resistant to GPUs working in parallel?
These are not new questions. We are always asking ourselves these and other questions in order to keep your 1Password data secure and protected, both now and in the future.
[Updated 2012-12-06 15:50 UTC. Updated to correctly explain that Gosney’s system is not limited to LM hashes. Thanks to Jeremi Grosney, Solar Designer, and others who pointed out my error. I have also taken the opportunity to add more clarifications and links to background throughout.]
Tweet about this post