Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72086 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 75692 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2014 16:18:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 3 Feb 2014 16:18:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@golemon.com; spf=softfail; sender-id=softfail Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@golemon.com; sender-id=softfail Received-SPF: softfail (pb1.pair.com: domain golemon.com does not designate 209.85.160.48 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@golemon.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.48 mail-pb0-f48.google.com Received: from [209.85.160.48] ([209.85.160.48:40224] helo=mail-pb0-f48.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9F/26-35654-C61CFE25 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:18:52 -0500 Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id rr13so7184493pbb.21 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 08:18:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FLN8ZWFTBAEt9vRWD04Zz7r5ufF+dk9CUn2yrxIcGUM=; b=NkMqF9fT/GPy57oifmrdytOeknNzyFrbzCYkvDLP8Zz9tQqeTJEK89lefGtCfyGJ+g cNwyMyANlS66tNWO/Is5UhHLZO8IkQwPvR7E+pHI8+EjxLyd/n2T68FGJYJlt24mS3LC ru3xnCN93G1BE9GT/KMIL6b/734oXDt6UymKAqnv/x6tr5/D7XHGKm2WTDANc0ZCo+OL 4hh/clNniZIs2Gm0vlXvZ4NWSFz6H8+xChOGFL8Ls5CWEpyg4vaZd0yoxE5yTM3kSORg RbHDajrYdzzSEX2LWXXKz9jkt7FfRGUThUJX5Gq7++wYZNGSWrtbZ1T0XzPaMc9JACYo YuwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwdJW4K9w2Tsr8kchjPO7JrrN4UIUiWBfCIQhklsN8jOLc+oVP9SoJmxtHGb4lKM5qRI5M MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.251.42 with SMTP id zh10mr38617480pac.84.1391444329608; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 08:18:49 -0800 (PST) Sender: php@golemon.com Received: by 10.70.38.234 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 08:18:49 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [24.130.180.66] In-Reply-To: <9E3AA302-1EC1-4497-996F-716555CAAB64@rouvenwessling.de> References: <9E3AA302-1EC1-4497-996F-716555CAAB64@rouvenwessling.de> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 08:18:49 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: rMsH8c9IBvmMVKc9Ovd1ZB7zo1g Message-ID: To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rouven_We=DFling?= Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Timing attack safe string comparison function From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon) On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Rouven We=DFling wro= te: > as I've received no further feedback I've opened the voting on "Timing at= tack safe string comparison function": > > - https://wiki.php.net/rfc/timing_attack > > Voting ends on 2014/02/09 11:00PM UTC > Voted yes, but IMO the comparison function should behave a little more like =3D=3D=3D. That is: something like hash_compare(null,"") should retur= n false. Possibly be even more strict and require both input parameters to be string (e.g. hash_compare(123,123) would return false as well). But there's some "non-PHP"ish about that idea so I'm not horribly fussed by= it. -Sara