Detect duplicates without exposing underlying dataPassword Hashing: add salt + pepper or is salt enough?User authentication + database encryption with same passwordAPI message verification without storing private key?HMACs that have the same key and messageWhat's the recommended way to store at-rest, symmetrically encrypted customer data?How to store secret key used for hashing?Encrypt User specific Information without a password

Late 1970's and 6502 chip facilities for operating systems

What is the size of a set of sets of the empty set , , ?

My Project Manager does not accept carry-over in Scrum, Is that normal?

If an object moving in a circle experiences centripetal force, then doesn't it also experience centrifugal force, because of Newton's third law?

On the meaning of 'anyways' in "What Exactly Is a Quartz Crystal, Anyways?"

Why are there two fundamental laws of logic?

Is there any iPhone SE out there with 3D Touch?

Safe to use 220V electric clothes dryer when building has been bridged down to 110V?

Which place in our solar system is the most fit for terraforming?

Does Sitecore have support for Sitecore products in containers?

Organisational search option

Co-Supervisor comes to office to help her students which distracts me

Is there a way to hide HTML source code yet keeping it effective?

A simple game that keeps track of the number of questions asked

Is it a good idea to leave minor world details to the reader's imagination?

Why does this image of Jupiter look so strange?

Can I take NEW (still in their boxes) PC PARTS in my checked in luggage?

A food item only made possible by time-freezing storage?

Can Northern Ireland's border issue be solved by repartition?

Is it true that, "just ten trading days represent 63 per cent of the returns of the past 50 years"?

How do I set a custom order for folders on Windows 7 and 10?

extracting sublists

To what extent is it worthwhile to report check fraud / refund scams?

What Secular Civic Space Would Pioneers Build For Small Frontier Towns?



Detect duplicates without exposing underlying data


Password Hashing: add salt + pepper or is salt enough?User authentication + database encryption with same passwordAPI message verification without storing private key?HMACs that have the same key and messageWhat's the recommended way to store at-rest, symmetrically encrypted customer data?How to store secret key used for hashing?Encrypt User specific Information without a password






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








4















We have a scenario where we need to prevent two users from using the same identifier. The identifier is sensitive (e.g. a social security number), so we do not want to store it in our DB. We just want to store some sort of hash that allows us to prevent subsequent users from using it again. And we want to do it securely, so that in the event that the database ever leaked, an attacker could not figure out the original values.



Is it possible to do securely? What is the recommended way?



Based on some research, it seems like a HMAC might work. If that's the case, what's the recommended algorithm? Should it be something slow (like scrypt with a fixed key salt), so that if the key is ever exposed, it's still difficult to uncover the values? Or is there no protection against that?










share|improve this question







New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 2





    scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

    – Conor Mancone
    11 hours ago












  • @MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

    – Peter Watts
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

    – timuzhti
    11 hours ago

















4















We have a scenario where we need to prevent two users from using the same identifier. The identifier is sensitive (e.g. a social security number), so we do not want to store it in our DB. We just want to store some sort of hash that allows us to prevent subsequent users from using it again. And we want to do it securely, so that in the event that the database ever leaked, an attacker could not figure out the original values.



Is it possible to do securely? What is the recommended way?



Based on some research, it seems like a HMAC might work. If that's the case, what's the recommended algorithm? Should it be something slow (like scrypt with a fixed key salt), so that if the key is ever exposed, it's still difficult to uncover the values? Or is there no protection against that?










share|improve this question







New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 2





    scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

    – Conor Mancone
    11 hours ago












  • @MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

    – Peter Watts
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

    – timuzhti
    11 hours ago













4












4








4


0






We have a scenario where we need to prevent two users from using the same identifier. The identifier is sensitive (e.g. a social security number), so we do not want to store it in our DB. We just want to store some sort of hash that allows us to prevent subsequent users from using it again. And we want to do it securely, so that in the event that the database ever leaked, an attacker could not figure out the original values.



Is it possible to do securely? What is the recommended way?



Based on some research, it seems like a HMAC might work. If that's the case, what's the recommended algorithm? Should it be something slow (like scrypt with a fixed key salt), so that if the key is ever exposed, it's still difficult to uncover the values? Or is there no protection against that?










share|improve this question







New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











We have a scenario where we need to prevent two users from using the same identifier. The identifier is sensitive (e.g. a social security number), so we do not want to store it in our DB. We just want to store some sort of hash that allows us to prevent subsequent users from using it again. And we want to do it securely, so that in the event that the database ever leaked, an attacker could not figure out the original values.



Is it possible to do securely? What is the recommended way?



Based on some research, it seems like a HMAC might work. If that's the case, what's the recommended algorithm? Should it be something slow (like scrypt with a fixed key salt), so that if the key is ever exposed, it's still difficult to uncover the values? Or is there no protection against that?







encryption hash sha hmac scrypt






share|improve this question







New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










share|improve this question







New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








asked 11 hours ago









Peter WattsPeter Watts

211 bronze badge




211 bronze badge




New contributor



Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




New contributor




Peter Watts is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • 2





    scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

    – Conor Mancone
    11 hours ago












  • @MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

    – Peter Watts
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

    – timuzhti
    11 hours ago












  • 2





    scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 2





    How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

    – Conor Mancone
    11 hours ago












  • @MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

    – Peter Watts
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

    – MechMK1
    11 hours ago






  • 1





    @MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

    – timuzhti
    11 hours ago







2




2





scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

– MechMK1
11 hours ago





scrypt is not a HMAC, scrypt is a Key-Derivation Function. A KDF is just fine for these purposes. I recommend Argon2id.

– MechMK1
11 hours ago




2




2





How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

– Conor Mancone
11 hours ago






How much "entropy" does your identifier have? For instance, if it is a social security number, then even a naive calculation suggests the total amount of entropy is low (9 digits = 1 billion possibilities), although actually entropy is much less than that even. As a result, hashing can be very ineffective, because brute-forcing is relatively easy, and extra care is needed. Is it actually a SSN, or is that just an example you picked?

– Conor Mancone
11 hours ago














@MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

– Peter Watts
11 hours ago





@MechMK1 so you would use Argon2id with a fixed salt?

– Peter Watts
11 hours ago




1




1





@PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

– MechMK1
11 hours ago





@PeterWatts Why a fixed salt? That would make things worse. Argon2id has the ability to use a key, just like a HMAC would. Use a unique and sufficiently random salt, in combination with a long, sufficiently random key.

– MechMK1
11 hours ago




1




1





@MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

– timuzhti
11 hours ago





@MechMK1, I assume it's because the use case requires comparing equality.

– timuzhti
11 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















7
















I think you're not too far from a possible solution (aka using a modern KDF and effectively treating this like a password). However, there are some more considerations (which were already mentioned in comments):



  1. SSNs have very low entropy, which means that brute-force is an especially easy attack

  2. Since you need to find if the SSN has been used anywhere, you basically have to operate without a salt, which also makes brute-forcing substantially easier.

The combination of 1 & 2 would make a KDF a bad idea, even though it is your only option. As a result, finding a different business solution may be in order. However, I think there are a few steps you can take to mitigate the risk if SSN matching is an absolute requirement:



  1. Make sure and use a large "pepper". Peppers are less commonly used with passwords, so in case you aren't familiar: using a pepper basically means adding a large, constant, random string to the SSN before hashing which is not stored in the database. In this case I would use an especially long pepper. So in practice, this means that you create a 256 bit key that is not stored in the database or codebase but which is added to the SSN before hashing it. You would store it in an environment variable in your production server, or in your CD pipeline, so it is not readily accessible to developers (since they are sometimes the attacker, unfortunately). The reason for this is that if your database leaks but the attacker doesn't have the pepper, then they cannot bruteforce the SSNs (because bruteforcing the SSN would basically require first bruteforcing your 256 bit key, which is impossible).

  2. Use a very large cost function. All modern KDFs have a configurable cost function, that increases the time it takes to buid the hash (therefore making brute force harder). For something like this I'd set an even-higher-than-usual cost function. I'd probably tune it so that your systems take 1-2 seconds to hash the SSN+pepper. Go even higher if your users can tolerate the wait! This won't fix your bruteforce issue, but it will help.

  3. Anonymize these hashed SSNs! Basically, store them in a table by themselves with no way to associate them with any other data in the system (i.e. don't assign an autoincrementing id to this table or an entry time, since those might correlate with other tables). Have one table with just one column that is for this purpose and this purpose only. While the SSN alone is still personal information, it is much less dangerous to your users if it is leaked by itself without any further information. Having a table with just the hashed SSNs will still allow you to verify if an SSN has been entered before, so your overall goal can still be accomplished.

So again, your best bet might simply be to find a completely different way to do this without using SSNs. However, if this is an absolute business requirement, then the above steps can go a long way to securing your customer's personal data. Still, I would also check with regulatory requirements for your industry to make sure that you abide by all applicable rules.






share|improve this answer

























  • Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

    – Peter Watts
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

    – John Wu
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

    – timuzhti
    1 hour ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "162"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);







Peter Watts is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded
















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f218360%2fdetect-duplicates-without-exposing-underlying-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









7
















I think you're not too far from a possible solution (aka using a modern KDF and effectively treating this like a password). However, there are some more considerations (which were already mentioned in comments):



  1. SSNs have very low entropy, which means that brute-force is an especially easy attack

  2. Since you need to find if the SSN has been used anywhere, you basically have to operate without a salt, which also makes brute-forcing substantially easier.

The combination of 1 & 2 would make a KDF a bad idea, even though it is your only option. As a result, finding a different business solution may be in order. However, I think there are a few steps you can take to mitigate the risk if SSN matching is an absolute requirement:



  1. Make sure and use a large "pepper". Peppers are less commonly used with passwords, so in case you aren't familiar: using a pepper basically means adding a large, constant, random string to the SSN before hashing which is not stored in the database. In this case I would use an especially long pepper. So in practice, this means that you create a 256 bit key that is not stored in the database or codebase but which is added to the SSN before hashing it. You would store it in an environment variable in your production server, or in your CD pipeline, so it is not readily accessible to developers (since they are sometimes the attacker, unfortunately). The reason for this is that if your database leaks but the attacker doesn't have the pepper, then they cannot bruteforce the SSNs (because bruteforcing the SSN would basically require first bruteforcing your 256 bit key, which is impossible).

  2. Use a very large cost function. All modern KDFs have a configurable cost function, that increases the time it takes to buid the hash (therefore making brute force harder). For something like this I'd set an even-higher-than-usual cost function. I'd probably tune it so that your systems take 1-2 seconds to hash the SSN+pepper. Go even higher if your users can tolerate the wait! This won't fix your bruteforce issue, but it will help.

  3. Anonymize these hashed SSNs! Basically, store them in a table by themselves with no way to associate them with any other data in the system (i.e. don't assign an autoincrementing id to this table or an entry time, since those might correlate with other tables). Have one table with just one column that is for this purpose and this purpose only. While the SSN alone is still personal information, it is much less dangerous to your users if it is leaked by itself without any further information. Having a table with just the hashed SSNs will still allow you to verify if an SSN has been entered before, so your overall goal can still be accomplished.

So again, your best bet might simply be to find a completely different way to do this without using SSNs. However, if this is an absolute business requirement, then the above steps can go a long way to securing your customer's personal data. Still, I would also check with regulatory requirements for your industry to make sure that you abide by all applicable rules.






share|improve this answer

























  • Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

    – Peter Watts
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

    – John Wu
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

    – timuzhti
    1 hour ago















7
















I think you're not too far from a possible solution (aka using a modern KDF and effectively treating this like a password). However, there are some more considerations (which were already mentioned in comments):



  1. SSNs have very low entropy, which means that brute-force is an especially easy attack

  2. Since you need to find if the SSN has been used anywhere, you basically have to operate without a salt, which also makes brute-forcing substantially easier.

The combination of 1 & 2 would make a KDF a bad idea, even though it is your only option. As a result, finding a different business solution may be in order. However, I think there are a few steps you can take to mitigate the risk if SSN matching is an absolute requirement:



  1. Make sure and use a large "pepper". Peppers are less commonly used with passwords, so in case you aren't familiar: using a pepper basically means adding a large, constant, random string to the SSN before hashing which is not stored in the database. In this case I would use an especially long pepper. So in practice, this means that you create a 256 bit key that is not stored in the database or codebase but which is added to the SSN before hashing it. You would store it in an environment variable in your production server, or in your CD pipeline, so it is not readily accessible to developers (since they are sometimes the attacker, unfortunately). The reason for this is that if your database leaks but the attacker doesn't have the pepper, then they cannot bruteforce the SSNs (because bruteforcing the SSN would basically require first bruteforcing your 256 bit key, which is impossible).

  2. Use a very large cost function. All modern KDFs have a configurable cost function, that increases the time it takes to buid the hash (therefore making brute force harder). For something like this I'd set an even-higher-than-usual cost function. I'd probably tune it so that your systems take 1-2 seconds to hash the SSN+pepper. Go even higher if your users can tolerate the wait! This won't fix your bruteforce issue, but it will help.

  3. Anonymize these hashed SSNs! Basically, store them in a table by themselves with no way to associate them with any other data in the system (i.e. don't assign an autoincrementing id to this table or an entry time, since those might correlate with other tables). Have one table with just one column that is for this purpose and this purpose only. While the SSN alone is still personal information, it is much less dangerous to your users if it is leaked by itself without any further information. Having a table with just the hashed SSNs will still allow you to verify if an SSN has been entered before, so your overall goal can still be accomplished.

So again, your best bet might simply be to find a completely different way to do this without using SSNs. However, if this is an absolute business requirement, then the above steps can go a long way to securing your customer's personal data. Still, I would also check with regulatory requirements for your industry to make sure that you abide by all applicable rules.






share|improve this answer

























  • Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

    – Peter Watts
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

    – John Wu
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

    – timuzhti
    1 hour ago













7














7










7









I think you're not too far from a possible solution (aka using a modern KDF and effectively treating this like a password). However, there are some more considerations (which were already mentioned in comments):



  1. SSNs have very low entropy, which means that brute-force is an especially easy attack

  2. Since you need to find if the SSN has been used anywhere, you basically have to operate without a salt, which also makes brute-forcing substantially easier.

The combination of 1 & 2 would make a KDF a bad idea, even though it is your only option. As a result, finding a different business solution may be in order. However, I think there are a few steps you can take to mitigate the risk if SSN matching is an absolute requirement:



  1. Make sure and use a large "pepper". Peppers are less commonly used with passwords, so in case you aren't familiar: using a pepper basically means adding a large, constant, random string to the SSN before hashing which is not stored in the database. In this case I would use an especially long pepper. So in practice, this means that you create a 256 bit key that is not stored in the database or codebase but which is added to the SSN before hashing it. You would store it in an environment variable in your production server, or in your CD pipeline, so it is not readily accessible to developers (since they are sometimes the attacker, unfortunately). The reason for this is that if your database leaks but the attacker doesn't have the pepper, then they cannot bruteforce the SSNs (because bruteforcing the SSN would basically require first bruteforcing your 256 bit key, which is impossible).

  2. Use a very large cost function. All modern KDFs have a configurable cost function, that increases the time it takes to buid the hash (therefore making brute force harder). For something like this I'd set an even-higher-than-usual cost function. I'd probably tune it so that your systems take 1-2 seconds to hash the SSN+pepper. Go even higher if your users can tolerate the wait! This won't fix your bruteforce issue, but it will help.

  3. Anonymize these hashed SSNs! Basically, store them in a table by themselves with no way to associate them with any other data in the system (i.e. don't assign an autoincrementing id to this table or an entry time, since those might correlate with other tables). Have one table with just one column that is for this purpose and this purpose only. While the SSN alone is still personal information, it is much less dangerous to your users if it is leaked by itself without any further information. Having a table with just the hashed SSNs will still allow you to verify if an SSN has been entered before, so your overall goal can still be accomplished.

So again, your best bet might simply be to find a completely different way to do this without using SSNs. However, if this is an absolute business requirement, then the above steps can go a long way to securing your customer's personal data. Still, I would also check with regulatory requirements for your industry to make sure that you abide by all applicable rules.






share|improve this answer













I think you're not too far from a possible solution (aka using a modern KDF and effectively treating this like a password). However, there are some more considerations (which were already mentioned in comments):



  1. SSNs have very low entropy, which means that brute-force is an especially easy attack

  2. Since you need to find if the SSN has been used anywhere, you basically have to operate without a salt, which also makes brute-forcing substantially easier.

The combination of 1 & 2 would make a KDF a bad idea, even though it is your only option. As a result, finding a different business solution may be in order. However, I think there are a few steps you can take to mitigate the risk if SSN matching is an absolute requirement:



  1. Make sure and use a large "pepper". Peppers are less commonly used with passwords, so in case you aren't familiar: using a pepper basically means adding a large, constant, random string to the SSN before hashing which is not stored in the database. In this case I would use an especially long pepper. So in practice, this means that you create a 256 bit key that is not stored in the database or codebase but which is added to the SSN before hashing it. You would store it in an environment variable in your production server, or in your CD pipeline, so it is not readily accessible to developers (since they are sometimes the attacker, unfortunately). The reason for this is that if your database leaks but the attacker doesn't have the pepper, then they cannot bruteforce the SSNs (because bruteforcing the SSN would basically require first bruteforcing your 256 bit key, which is impossible).

  2. Use a very large cost function. All modern KDFs have a configurable cost function, that increases the time it takes to buid the hash (therefore making brute force harder). For something like this I'd set an even-higher-than-usual cost function. I'd probably tune it so that your systems take 1-2 seconds to hash the SSN+pepper. Go even higher if your users can tolerate the wait! This won't fix your bruteforce issue, but it will help.

  3. Anonymize these hashed SSNs! Basically, store them in a table by themselves with no way to associate them with any other data in the system (i.e. don't assign an autoincrementing id to this table or an entry time, since those might correlate with other tables). Have one table with just one column that is for this purpose and this purpose only. While the SSN alone is still personal information, it is much less dangerous to your users if it is leaked by itself without any further information. Having a table with just the hashed SSNs will still allow you to verify if an SSN has been entered before, so your overall goal can still be accomplished.

So again, your best bet might simply be to find a completely different way to do this without using SSNs. However, if this is an absolute business requirement, then the above steps can go a long way to securing your customer's personal data. Still, I would also check with regulatory requirements for your industry to make sure that you abide by all applicable rules.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 9 hours ago









Conor ManconeConor Mancone

15.6k7 gold badges47 silver badges64 bronze badges




15.6k7 gold badges47 silver badges64 bronze badges















  • Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

    – Peter Watts
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

    – John Wu
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

    – timuzhti
    1 hour ago

















  • Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

    – Peter Watts
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

    – John Wu
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

    – timuzhti
    1 hour ago
















Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

– Peter Watts
5 hours ago





Ah! I had not considered that 3rd step. While it would be nice to know which user was associated with the re-used identifier, it's not critical, and seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

– Peter Watts
5 hours ago




1




1





The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

– John Wu
2 hours ago






The problem with storing the SSN with no identifying information is that it provides no recourse in the case of a collision. A hacker could (for example) enroll thousands of random SSNs in an application DoS attack, denying legitimate users the ability to use their own SSN if they are unfortunate enough to collide.

– John Wu
2 hours ago





1




1





Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

– timuzhti
1 hour ago





Maybe a hardware security module can be used to store the pepper, if a suitable one can be found, to make it even harder to steal.

– timuzhti
1 hour ago











Peter Watts is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded

















Peter Watts is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Peter Watts is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Peter Watts is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Information Security Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f218360%2fdetect-duplicates-without-exposing-underlying-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

Smell Mother Skizze Discussion Tachometer Jar Alligator Star 끌다 자세 의문 과학적t Barbaric The round system critiques the connection. Definition: A wind instrument of music in use among the Spaniards Nasty Level 이상 분노 금년 월급 근교 Cloth Owner Permissible Shock Purring Parched Raise 오전 장면 햄 서투르다 The smash instructs the squeamish instrument. Large Nosy Nalpure Chalk Travel Crayon Bite your tongue The Hulk 신호 대사 사과하다 The work boosts the knowledgeable size. Steeplump Level Wooden Shake Teaching Jump 이제 복도 접다 공중전화 부지런하다 Rub Average Ruthless Busyglide Glost oven Didelphia Control A fly on the wall Jaws 지하철 거