MagicStack / MagicStack/asyncpg

SCRAM: _generate_salted_password reimplements PBKDF2 in Python; hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac is ~30x faster and bit-identical

Aperta Adatta ai principianti
#1,357 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Lingua principale
Python
Stelle
8.1k
Fork
468
Metriche di merge delle PR
Nessuna PR unita negli ultimi 30g

Descrizione

Summary

SCRAMAuthentication._generate_salted_password() implements PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256 as a Python-level loop. hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac('sha256', ...) computes the identical value in C and is ~27–31× faster. Since this runs on the event loop on every new connection, it shows up as a measurable stall for workloads that open connections often (pool overflow, bursty traffic, short-lived tasks).

Where

asyncpg/protocol/scram.pyx (current master):

ui = hmac.new(p, s + b'\x00\x00\x00\x01', self.DIGEST)
u = ui.digest()
for x in range(iterations - 1):
    ui = hmac.new(p, ui.digest(), hashlib.sha256)
    u = self._bytes_xor(u, ui.digest())
return u

That is exactly the "Hi" function from RFC 5802, i.e. PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256 with dkLen = hLen — which the stdlib already provides.

_bytes_xor is a Python generator over zip(), so each of the 4095 iterations allocates two digests and XORs 32 bytes one byte at a time.

Measurements

PostgreSQL's default scram_iterations is 4096.

Environment Python loop hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac Factor
Debian container, x86_64, CPython 3.11 28.6 ms 0.915 ms 31×
macOS 26, arm64, CPython 3.12 9.28 ms 0.337 ms 27×

Output is bit-identical:

import hashlib, hmac, time

def asyncpg_way(p, s, it):
    ui = hmac.new(p, s + b'\x00\x00\x00\x01', hashlib.sha256)
    u = ui.digest()
    for _ in range(it - 1):
        ui = hmac.new(p, ui.digest(), hashlib.sha256)
        u = bytes(x ^ y for x, y in zip(u, ui.digest()))
    return u

p, s, iters = b"correct horse battery staple", b"0123456789abcdef", 4096
assert asyncpg_way(p, s, iters) == hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac("sha256", p, s, iters)

for name, fn in (("loop", asyncpg_way),
                 ("pbkdf2_hmac", lambda p, s, i: hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac("sha256", p, s, i))):
    fn(p, s, iters)
    t = time.perf_counter(); n = 0
    while time.perf_counter() - t < 2.0:
        fn(p, s, iters); n += 1
    print(f"{name:12} {(time.perf_counter()-t)/n*1000:7.3f} ms")
Why it matters in practice

We hit this while profiling event-loop stalls in a FastAPI/SQLAlchemy service with password_encryption = scram-sha-256. py-spy attributed ~16 % of total event-loop CPU to hmac.py with no application frame above it — the caller is invisible because scram.pyx is Cython-compiled, so only the Python hmac.new frames show up. It took a while to identify.

The trigger was connection churn: our SQLAlchemy pool was discarding overflow connections, so ~255 connections/minute were being established, each paying ~28.6 ms of PBKDF2 synchronously on the event loop — roughly 7 seconds of blocked loop per minute.

Fixing the churn on our side was the main remedy, and I'm not suggesting asyncpg is responsible for that. But a connection establishment costing 28.6 ms of CPU rather than 0.9 ms makes any such situation ~30× worse than it needs to be, and it's on the loop.

Suggested change
cdef _generate_salted_password(self, str password, bytes salt, int iterations):
    """This follows the "Hi" algorithm specified in RFC5802"""
    return hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac(
        'sha256', password.encode('utf8'), base64.b64decode(salt), iterations
    )

Note the loop already hardcodes hashlib.sha256 (while the first hmac.new uses self.DIGEST), so the function is SHA-256-only as it stands — no digest agility is lost by naming 'sha256' explicitly. If DIGEST should ever become configurable, pbkdf2_hmac takes the algorithm name as its first argument, so the change doesn't stand in the way.

_bytes_xor would become unused unless it's referenced elsewhere.

Happy to open a PR if the direction looks right.

Related

#378 (Support using pre-hashed passwords) would sidestep the derivation entirely, which is a broader change; this one is a drop-in replacement with identical output.

Guida per i contributori

Nessuna guida per i contributori indicizzata per questo repository

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia in asyncpg/protocol/scram.pyx, in SCRAMAuthentication._generate_salted_password(), e verifica il ciclo PBKDF2 esistente e l’helper _bytes_xor. Sostituisci la derivazione a livello Python con l’equivalente della libreria standard, quindi verifica che il suo output rimanga bit-identico per gli input SCRAM SHA-256 esistenti e conferma che l’helper inutilizzato non abbia altri riferimenti.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Valutazione

Stack tecnologico
postgresql, python
Ambito
authentication, backend, databases, performance
Tipo di issue
Refactoring
Difficoltà
2/5
Tempo stimato
1-3 ore
Stato di attività
Attiva
Chiarezza
Specificata chiaramente
Idoneità per principianti
78/100

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.