Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Thanks for sharing. Curious: at the time of conversion, why not run everything through bcrypt, rather than keeping a dual system? (This way, the old passwords get validated with ->SHA1->digest->bcrypt, and the new passwords get validated with ->bcrypt, but either way everything in the system is bcrypted.)

My guess is that it was a CPU cost decision but I'm curious anyway.




My guess is to avoid asking every user to change their password. From a UX perspective, it's not a nice thing to ask. This has nothing to do with security, where I agree that having one system is certainly better.


There is a way to improve the security of weakly hashed passwords without having to ask the user to change their password - http://blog.jgc.org/2012/06/one-way-to-fix-your-rubbish-pass...


Nobody would have to change their password, the suggested change would only affect Kickstarter's internals. You'd still have two different systems in place like in the solution that was actually implemented, but both of them would contain a 'brcypt'.


The point of carbocation's technique is to avoid requiring users to reset their passwords, but to protect every user with bcrypt. The existing SHA password hashes could be used as the input to bcrypt.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: