TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why doesn't OWASP recommend to hash passwords both on the client and the server?

2 点作者 lmcarreiro将近 7 年前
Since the recent problems with GitHub and Twitter:<p>- https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bleepingcomputer.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;security&#x2F;github-accidentally-recorded-some-plaintext-passwords-in-its-internal-logs&#x2F;<p>- https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bleepingcomputer.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;security&#x2F;twitter-admits-recording-plaintext-passwords-in-internal-logs-just-like-github&#x2F;<p>I was wondering, why isn&#x27;t the best practice to bcrypt the password both on the client and the server? Since I won&#x27;t change anything that already are the best practices for the server side (salt, strong hash, HTTPS), it can only be safer. The server would consider the already hashed password as the password, and would hash it again before store it.<p>- In case I log the entire request when an exception is thrown, if an exception happens in the login&#x2F;signup request, I would never get access to the user plaintext password<p>- I know that if somebody have access to these only-client-side-hashed passwords, either by MITM (which a lot of companies do in their private networks replacing the SSL certificates) or by logs or a malicious server administrator, they would be able to use it to authenticate in my site, but wouldn&#x27;t have access to the plaintext password, so it would never compromise the user&#x27;s account in other sites and services (even for those users that reuse their passwords)<p>Cross-posted from my stackoverflow&#x27;s question: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stackoverflow.com&#x2F;questions&#x2F;50701933&#x2F;why-doesnt-owasp-recommend-to-bcrypt-the-password-both-on-the-client-and-the-se

1 comment

thebrain将近 7 年前
Because then you&#x27;d have to expose how you did the hashing.
评论 #17239221 未加载