Re: [RFC][VOTE] Improve hash_hkdf() parameter
| From: | Yasuo Ohgaki | Date: | Sat, 01 Apr 2017 02:50:53 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC][VOTE] Improve hash_hkdf() parameter | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-98710@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi all,
- insecure signature (it ignores strong RFC 5689 recommendation)
s/RFC 5689/RFC 5869/
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
>
> Given that the function is live in the wild, massively changing the order
>> of things and defaults is an instant red flag for myself, and I believe a
>> lot of other people.
>>
>
> Aside from it should not be merged into PHP 7.1 in the first place.
> There are only 2 (or 3) bug fix versions released. Fixing mistake ASAP is
> better. IMHO.
>
>
> To me this sounds more like an issue that could be relatively quickly
>> improved by a documentation update that highlights how to securely use the
>> function.
>>
>
> While documentation may work, it seems silly for me to write,
>
> Even if "salt" is the last optional parameter, users must set
> appropriate "salt" whenever it is possible for maximum key security.
>
Another possible resolution could be reverting hash_hkdf() merge from 7.1
branch.
Basic hash_hkdf() operation could be done by hash_hmac() easily.
The merge should have had PHP RFC.
Reverting hash_hkdf() merge may work better.
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net