MagicStack / MagicStack/asyncpg
SCRAM: _generate_salted_password reimplements PBKDF2 in Python; hashlib.pbkdf2_hmac is ~30x faster and bit-identical
まだ誰も着手していません。
- 主要言語
- Python
- スター
- 8.1k
- フォーク
- 468
- PR マージ指標
- 30日以内にマージされた PR はありません
説明
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.
コントリビューションガイド
このリポジトリのコントリビューションガイドは索引されていません
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
調査の方向性
asyncpg/protocol/scram.pyx の SCRAMAuthentication._generate_salted_password() から始め、既存の PBKDF2 ループと _bytes_xor ヘルパーを確認します。Python レベルの導出を標準ライブラリ相当のものに置き換え、その後、既存の SHA-256 SCRAM 入力に対する出力がビット単位で同一のままであることを検証し、未使用のヘルパーに他の参照がないことを確認します。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
評価
- 技術スタック
- postgresql, python
- 領域
- authentication, backend, databases, performance
- issue の種類
- リファクタリング
- 難易度
- 2/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1〜3時間
- 活発さ
- 活発
- 明瞭さ
- 明確に書かれている
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 78/100