Sorry for multiple posts.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since comparison of short and/or not hashed data (e.g. user supplied raw
> password) should
> not be done as the function name imply, we may better to document so that
> users always
> compare hashed values even when they store raw password/etc.
> So randomized delay may be overkill.
>
Because user should not pass other than hashed values, we may
return FALSE simply when length mismatches. Generated hashed
length should not be a secret. This get rid of length leak issue and
the function name is good for this purpose and make the operation
always constant.
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
[email protected]