Back when the Internet was born it was primarily used by academics and Universities and the Internet was not perceived as a place of threats, so simple passwords were used.
But as always happens when you have something great and let humans access it, a small minority try to cause grief. So "type 7" passwords came into life.
Then came Type 5 passwords. A big improvement. This was based on the Unix password storage system. The passwords are salted (this basically means extra random information is added so that you can't use a simple encrypted password lookup table (called a rainbow table) to get back the plain text password, and then MD5 is run over the result 1000 times with a little of bit magic happening at each iteration.
All was well with the world for quite some time, but then Moore's law kicked in. And we had so much CPU power that MD5 hashing became too weak.
There was also another fundamental problem. Hashes, like MD5, SHA1, SHA256, etc, are intended to detect modification of the encrypted data. Or to put it another way, hashes allow you to detect when someone has tampered with the data. Hashes were never intended to be used for actual password storage. Hashes were used because they were common - but it seems mis-understood.
Then came an abortion, type 4 passwords. This was meant to be an implementation of PBKDF2. But there was an accident. Cisco's implementation "forgot" to add a salt, and used only a single iteration of SHA256. Under no circumstances should this be used. You are better of using a type 5 password.
Then came type 8 passwords using PBKDF2, but implemented properly. This was a huge step forward. It uses 20,000 iterations of SHA256. I consider PBKDF2 very good, but I don't use it. Basically it relies on using lots of iterations of SHA256 to provide the security. I don't use it because it is primarily SHA256 based - once again something designed to detect changes in the original data - not for storing passwords.
Type 9 - Use Me!
And lastly came type 9 passwords using scrypt. script does use SHA256, but it is just a small part of a much larger crypto algorithm - and for the first time in a very long time in the history of passwords, it was purpose built to store passwords. At last!
scrypto is hellishly CPU intensive. So you can't just do a brute force attack (at least not on a reasonably complex password). It needs a good dob of memory for password encryption. When you are only encrypting one password you won't notice it. However it means it is hard to use a GPU or hardware ASIC to do password breaking in parallel because all those these kinds of devices have lots of compute cores they don't have enough RAM to be able to use them. scrypt has been deliberately designed to make it difficult to decrypt in parallel.
So now we have a super strong, purpose designed password storage algorithm. The question is why wouldn't you use it?
To create an enable password using it simply use the "algorithm-type scrypt" option.
We are screwed. Quantum computing is going to turn the world of encryption on its head. We have maybe 10 years.
There is no long term future for passwords. We need something completely different. Maybe a DNA print, but humans are 99.5% similar, so perhaps not. I suspect it will be something that does not exist at this point in time.
Maybe you can solve the problem, and become the future savour of computer security.
Hello, I have configured Anyconnect on ASAv and configured SAML authentication with Azure. When I test the SSO using web I am redirected back to the same asa logon page. With Anyconnect client its says "Authentication failed due to problem ...
Hi!, I´ve been stuck on this for a coupe of days, so any advice would be appreciated. I have a DNS and directory services servers on Amazon,which my clients should authenticate to, and they are reachable via IPSEC VPN (so far so good). When I t...
Hello All, One of our customer has 2 Cisco ESAs running in a cluster. Currently they have two MX records published in public DNS with same preference (say 10). The customer has F5 load balancer and now they are asking whether it is possible to place ...
Hey,I don't get the followingnat (outside,dmz) source static any any destination static 22.214.171.124 126.96.36.199 unidirectional no-proxy-arp1) Why does the ASA respond using Proxy ARP for the global address? (The asa's own interface is 188.8.131.52/24)2) ASDM warns abo...