SHA512 vs Blowfish and Bcrypt

Question

I m looking at hashing algorithms  but couldn t find an answer     Bcrypt uses Blowfish Blowfish is better than MD5 Q  but is Blowfish better than SHA512     Thanks     Update   I want to clarify that I understand the difference between hashing and encryption  What prompted me to ask the question this way is this article  where the author refers to bcrypt as  adaptive hashing   Since bcrypt is based on Blowfish  I was led to think that Blowfish is a hashing algorithm  If it s encryption as answers have pointed out  then seems to me like it shouldn t have a place in this article  What s worse is that he s concluding that bcrypt is the best   What s also confusing me now is that the phpass class  used for password hashing I believe  uses bcrypt  i e  blowfish  i e  encryption   Based on this new info you guys are telling me  blowfish is encryption   this class sounds wrong  Am I missing something

User · Answer

I would recommend Ulrich Drepper s SHA-256 SHA-512 based crypt implementation   We ported these algorithms to Java  and you can find a freely licensed version of them at ftp   ftp arlut utexas edu java hashes    Note that most modern  L Unices support Drepper s algorithm in their  etc shadow files

User · Answer

Blowfish isn t better than MD5 or SHA512  as they serve different purposes  MD5 and SHA512 are hashing algorithms  Blowfish is an encryption algorithm  Two entirely different cryptographic functions

User · Answer

Blowfish is not a hashing algorithm   It s an encryption algorithm   What that means is that you can encrypt something using blowfish  and then later on you can decrypt it back to plain text   SHA512 is a hashing algorithm   That means that  in theory  once you hash the input you can t get the original input back again   They re 2 different things  designed to be used for different tasks   There is no  correct  answer to  is blowfish better than SHA512    You might as well ask  are apples better than kangaroos    If you want to read some more on the topic here s some links    Blowfish SHA512

User · Answer

It should suffice to say whether bcrypt or SHA-512  in the context of an appropriate algorithm like PBKDF2  is good enough  And the answer is yes  either algorithm is secure enough that a breach will occur through an implementation flaw  not cryptanalysis   If you insist on knowing which is  better   SHA-512 has had in-depth reviews by NIST and others  It s good  but flaws have been recognized that  while not exploitable now  have led to the the SHA-3 competition for new hash algorithms  Also  keep in mind that the study of hash algorithms is  newer  than that of ciphers  and cryptographers are still learning about them   Even though bcrypt as a whole hasn t had as much scrutiny as Blowfish itself  I believe that being based on a cipher with a well-understood structure gives it some inherent security that hash-based authentication lacks  Also  it is easier to use common GPUs as a tool for attacking SHA-2 ndash based hashes  because of its memory requirements  optimizing bcrypt requires more specialized hardware like FPGA with some on-board RAM     Note  bcrypt is an algorithm that uses Blowfish internally  It is not an encryption algorithm itself  It is used to irreversibly obscure passwords  just as hash functions are used to do a  one-way hash    Cryptographic hash algorithms are designed to be impossible to reverse  In other words  given only the output of a hash function  it should take  forever  to find a message that will produce the same hash output  In fact  it should be computationally infeasible to find any two messages that produce the same hash value  Unlike a cipher  hash functions aren t parameterized with a key  the same input will always produce the same output   If someone provides a password that hashes to the value stored in the password table  they are authenticated  In particular  because of the irreversibility of the hash function  it s assumed that the user isn t an attacker that got hold of the hash and reversed it to find a working password   Now consider bcrypt  It uses Blowfish to encrypt a magic string  using a key  derived  from the password  Later  when a user enters a password  the key is derived again  and if the ciphertext produced by encrypting with that key matches the stored ciphertext  the user is authenticated  The ciphertext is stored in the  password  table  but the derived key is never stored   In order to break the cryptography here  an attacker would have to recover the key from the ciphertext  This is called a  known-plaintext  attack  since the attack knows the magic string that has been encrypted  but not the key used  Blowfish has been studied extensively  and no attacks are yet known that would allow an attacker to find the key with a single known plaintext   So  just like irreversible algorithms based cryptographic digests  bcrypt produces an irreversible output  from a password  salt  and cost factor  Its strength lies in Blowfish s resistance to known plaintext attacks  which is analogous to a  first pre-image attack  on a digest algorithm  Since it can be used in place of a hash algorithm to protect passwords  bcrypt is confusingly referred to as a  hash  algorithm itself   Assuming that rainbow tables have been thwarted by proper use of salt  any truly irreversible function reduces the attacker to trial-and-error  And the rate that the attacker can make trials is determined by the speed of that irreversible  hash  algorithm  If a single iteration of a hash function is used  an attacker can make millions of trials per second using equipment that costs on the order of  1000  testing all passwords up to 8 characters long in a few months    If however  the digest output is  fed back  thousands of times  it will take hundreds of years to test the same set of passwords on that hardware  Bcrypt achieves the same  key strengthening  effect by iterating inside its key derivation routine  and a proper hash-based method like PBKDF2 does the same thing  in this respect  the two methods are similar   So  my recommendation of bcrypt stems from the assumptions 1  that a Blowfish has had a similar level of scrutiny as the SHA-2 family of hash functions  and 2  that cryptanalytic methods for ciphers are better developed than those for hash functions

User · Answer

I agree with erickson s answer  with one caveat  for password authentication purposes  bcrypt is far better than a single iteration of SHA-512 - simply because it is far slower   If you don t get why slowness is an advantage in this particular game  read the article you linked to again  scroll down to  Speed is exactly what you don   t want in a password hash function      You can of course build a secure password hashing algorithm around SHA-512 by iterating it thousands of times  just like the way PHK s MD5 algorithm works   Ulrich Drepper did exactly this  for glibc s crypt     There s no particular reason to do this  though  if you already have a tested bcrypt implementation available

[security] SHA512 vs. Blowfish and Bcrypt

The answer is

Examples related to security

Examples related to encryption

Examples related to passwords

Examples related to hash

Tags