-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 117
Closed
Labels
❔ QuestionQuestion to the developerQuestion to the developer🎉 FeatureIdea or new feature to implementIdea or new feature to implementMinorDue to limited ressources, this issue will be treated with a minor priority.Due to limited ressources, this issue will be treated with a minor priority.
Description
"When using the SASL SCRAM mechanism, the SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS variant SHOULD be preferred over the SCRAM-SHA-256 variant, and SHA-256 variants [RFC7677] SHOULD be preferred over SHA-1 variants [RFC5802]".
SCRAM-SHA-1(-PLUS):
SCRAM-SHA-256(-PLUS):
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7677 since 2015-11-02
- https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8600 since 2019-06-21: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/suJMmeMhuAOmGn_PJYgX5Vm8lNA
SCRAM-SHA-512(-PLUS):
SCRAM-SHA3-512(-PLUS):
https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/hash-recommendations.html
Previous ticket included -PLUS variants has been closed:
It exists and managed by XMPP servers (look the last link):
- SCRAM-SHA-1: Support SCRAM-SHA-1 for authentication #37
- SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS
- SCRAM-SHA-224
- SCRAM-SHA-224-PLUS
- SCRAM-SHA-256
- SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS
- SCRAM-SHA-384
- SCRAM-SHA-384-PLUS
- SCRAM-SHA-512
- SCRAM-SHA-512-PLUS
Linked to:
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
❔ QuestionQuestion to the developerQuestion to the developer🎉 FeatureIdea or new feature to implementIdea or new feature to implementMinorDue to limited ressources, this issue will be treated with a minor priority.Due to limited ressources, this issue will be treated with a minor priority.