ScaffoldBench

RunHaiku 4.5repeat 2

Plan-execute-verify on OWASP vs NIST on password hashing

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001__plan-execute-verify__research-password-hashing__r2

Score

0.813

wrong answer
design ran as designed
Cost
$0.326
+ $0.069 judging
Latency
3m 16s
setup 0.0s, grading 4.9s
Turns
59
Tool calls
54
Subagents
0
Tokens in / out
847k / 20k
765,758 read from cache

Did the design run?

every check held
  • Run completed: heldharness.run-completedThe environment was built, the architecture returned and grading finished, none of them throwing.
  • No API failures: heldharness.apiNo model call failed at the API.
  • Every call ended: heldharness.calls-endedEvery call ended with a result, or was stopped by the run's own limits.
  • No harness tool denied: heldharness.harness-toolsThe sandbox guard never denied a harness tool, nor a tool the session itself offered.
  • Tool servers connected: heldharness.mcp-connectedEvery tool server the harness gave a call was connected when the session started.
  • No foreign tool servers: heldharness.mcp-hermeticNo call loaded a tool server the harness did not give it.
  • Builtin tools: heldharness.builtin-toolsA check recorded with the run.
  • Structured replies arrived: heldharness.structured-outputEvery call that asked for structured output and ran to the end got it.
  • No silent fallbacks: heldharness.not-degradedNo phase fell back on a default (an empty plan, a default winner) instead of its output.
  • Judge answered: heldharness.judgeAt least one grading call returned a usable verdict.
  • The plan was a plan: heldplan-execute-verify.planThe planner’s reply was read through its schema and held at least one step.
  • Every verdict was read: heldplan-execute-verify.verdictsEvery review round ended with a verdict read from the schema reply, not a default.
  • The loop did what its verdicts said: heldplan-execute-verify.loopEvery verdict that called for a revision got one, and nothing was revised without such a verdict.
  • Each call was shown the right tools: heldplan-execute-verify.toolsThe planner was shown no tools, the verifier the read-only ones, and the executor and reviser the full toolset.

Phases

Plan: 0.0s to 22.5s, finished, 0 tool calls, $0.017
Execute: 22.5s to 1m 39s, finished, 35 tool calls, $0.171
Verify: 1m 39s to 3m 16s, finished, 19 tool calls, $0.138

Drawn from the phase records: timing and cost per call, no tool calls or messages.

PhaseDurationCostTurnsToolsModel
Plan22.5s$0.01720claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Execute1m 16s$0.1713635claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
Verify1m 37s$0.1382119claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

The call-by-call replay is not published for this run. Traces are large, so the repository keeps 9 of this run set’s 900 and leaves the rest out; the score, phases and final answer on this page come from the committed run record.

Runs you can replay

Record this cell yourself: npm run bench -- run --strategies plan-execute-verify --tasks research-password-hashing --models claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 --repeats 1

Score breakdown

  • passStates that OWASP recommends Argon2id first, with a minimum configuration of 19 MiB of memory, an iteration count of 2 and 1 degree of parallelism.
    1.00weight 0.19

    met, backed by verified evidence E2. “Use Argon2id with a minimum configuration of 19 MiB of memory, an iteration count of 2, and 1 degree of parallelism.”

  • passStates OWASP's alternatives as conditions: scrypt if Argon2id is not available, bcrypt only for legacy systems, and PBKDF2 (at least 600,000 iterations with HMAC-SHA-256) if FIPS-140 compliance is required.
    1.00weight 0.13

    met, backed by verified evidence E3. “If Argon2id is not available, use scrypt with a minimum CPU/memory cost parameter of (2^17)”

  • passStates that the current NIST SP 800-63B (revision 4) requires passwords to be salted and hashed with a suitable password hashing scheme that takes a cost factor, and says an approved scheme from the latest revision of SP 800-132 (or updated NIST guidelines) SHOULD be used.
    1.00weight 0.19

    met, backed by verified evidence E4, E5. “An approved password hashing scheme published in the latest revision of [SP800-132] or updated NIST guidelines on password hashing schemes SHOULD be used.”

  • failStates that the superseded revision 3 named PBKDF2 and Balloon as example key derivation functions and said a memory-hard function SHOULD be used, and that revision 4 no longer contains that wording.
    0.00weight 0.13

    Not stated.

  • passExplains that for this team the two do not actually conflict: OWASP's own guidance is to use PBKDF2 (HMAC-SHA-256, at least 600,000 iterations) when FIPS-140 compliance is required, and NIST permits PBKDF2, so PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA-256 satisfies both; Argon2id remains OWASP's choice only where FIPS does not apply.
    1.00weight 0.25

    met, backed by verified evidence E3, E8. “If FIPS-140 compliance is required**: Use PBKDF2 with HMAC-SHA-256 and appropriate iteration counts (600,000+), which satisfies all three sets of requirements simultaneously”

  • partialStates at least one requirement both sources share, such as a unique salt for every password or a deliberately expensive hash with a tunable cost (work) factor instead of a fast general-purpose hash.
    0.50weight 0.13

    partial, backed by verified evidence E1. “they must be protected using strong, slow hashing algorithms such as Argon2id, bcrypt, or PBKDF2.”

Penalties

No penalties were applied.

Scorer metadata

corpus
{"version":2,"snapshot":"2026-10-01","hash":"e12dc326c69a32d91f85f6355dc63e2a7d672b605685a1ffa1582a42bb1c561e","documents":5}
opened documents
["owasp-password-storage","nist-sp800-63b-4"]
opened by role
{"primary":["owasp-password-storage","nist-sp800-63b-4"]}
displayed share
{"owasp-password-storage":0.7576,"owasp-authentication":0.0727,"nist-sp800-63b-3":0.0212,"nist-sp800-63b-4":0.1734,"rfc9106":0.1046}
cited count
2
verified count
2
hallucinated count
0
citation integrity
1
hallucinated urls
[]
evidence block
true
evidence block repaired
false
evidence count
8
verified quote count
8
verified quote rate
1
evidence
[{"url":"https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html","claim":"OWASP recommends Argon2id, scrypt, or bcrypt for password hashing","quote":"Passwords should never be stored in plain text. Instead, they must be protected using strong, slow hashing algorithms such as Argon2id, bcrypt, or PBKDF2.","verified":true,"document":"owasp-password-storage"},{"url":"https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html","claim":"OWASP's specific recommendations for Argon2id","quote":"Use Argon2id with a minimum configuration of 19 MiB of memory, an iteration count of 2, and 1 degree of parallelism.","verified":true,"document":"owasp-password-storage"},{"url":"https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html","claim":"OWASP recommends PBKDF2 for FIPS-140 compliance","quote":"If FIPS-140 compliance is required, use PBKDF2 with a work factor of 600,000 or more and set with an internal hash function of HMAC-SHA-256.","verified":true,"document":"owasp-password-storage"},{"url":"https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html","claim":"NIST SP 800-63B-4 requires passwords to be salted and hashed","quote":"Passwords SHALL be salted and hashed using a suitable password hashing scheme.","verified":true,"document":"nist-sp800-63b-4"},{"url":"https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html","claim":"NIST SP 800-63B-4 references approved password hashing schemes","quote":"An approved password hashing scheme published in the latest revision of [SP800-132] or updated NIST guidelines on password hashing schemes SHOULD be used.","verified":true,"document":"nist-sp800-63b-4"},{"url":"https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html","claim":"NIST defines approved cryptography as FIPS-approved or NIST-recommended algorithms","quote":"approved cryptography: An encryption algorithm, hash function, random bit generator, or similar technique that is Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)-approved or NIST-recommended. Approved algorithms and techniques are either specified or adopted in a FIPS or NIST recommendation.","verified":true,"document":"nist-sp800-63b-4"},{"url":"https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html","claim":"NIST requires federal agency verifiers to use FIPS-140 Level 1 validated cryptography","quote":"Cryptography used by verifiers operated by or on behalf of federal agencies at AAL1 SHALL be validated to meet the requirements of [FIPS140] Level 1.","verified":true,"document":"nist-sp800-63b-4"},{"url":"https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html","claim":"OWASP states that PBKDF2 is the preferred algorithm when both NIST SP 800-63B-4 and FIPS-140 compliance are required","quote":"Since PBKDF2 is permitted by NIST SP 800-63B-4 and has FIPS-140 validated implementations, it should be the preferred algorithm when these are required.","verified":true,"document":"owasp-password-storage"}]
judge unverified quotes
0
judge verdicts
[{"owasp-argon2id":{"status":"met","support":["E2"]},"owasp-conditions":{"status":"met","support":["E3"]},"nist-current":{"status":"met","support":["E4","E5"]},"nist-revision":{"status":"missing","support":[]},"reconciliation":{"status":"met","support":["E3","E8"]},"common-ground":{"status":"partial","support":["E1"]}},{"owasp-argon2id":{"status":"met","support":["E2"]},"owasp-conditions":{"status":"met","support":["E3"]},"nist-current":{"status":"met","support":["E4","E5"]},"nist-revision":{"status":"missing","support":[]},"reconciliation":{"status":"met","support":["E3","E8"]},"common-ground":{"status":"partial","support":["E1"]}},{"owasp-argon2id":{"status":"met","support":["E2"]},"owasp-conditions":{"status":"met","support":["E3"]},"nist-current":{"status":"met","support":["E4","E5"]},"nist-revision":{"status":"missing","support":[]},"reconciliation":{"status":"met","support":["E3","E8"]},"common-ground":{"status":"partial","support":["E1"]}}]
judge failures
0
grounded weight share
0.875 (88%)

Final answer

Now I have sufficient information to provide a comprehensive answer. Let me compile the findings.

Complete Answer

OWASP Password Storage Guidance:

The OWASP Password Storage Cheat Sheet recommends a hierarchy of password hashing algorithms. For general use without FIPS constraints, it states: "Passwords should never be stored in plain text. Instead, they must be protected using strong, slow hashing algorithms such as Argon2id, bcrypt, or PBKDF2." More specifically, OWASP prioritizes them as follows:

  1. Argon2id: "Use Argon2id with a minimum configuration of 19 MiB of memory, an iteration count of 2, and 1 degree of parallelism."
  2. scrypt: "If Argon2id is not available, use scrypt with a minimum CPU/memory cost parameter of (2^17), a minimum block size of 8 (1024 bytes), and a parallelization parameter of 1."
  3. bcrypt: "For legacy systems using bcrypt, use a work factor of 10 or more and with a password limit of 72 bytes."

For FIPS-140 compliance specifically, OWASP provides a distinct recommendation: "If FIPS-140 compliance is required, use PBKDF2 with a work factor of 600,000 or more and set with an internal hash function of HMAC-SHA-256."

NIST SP 800-63B-4 Requirements:

The current revision of NIST SP 800-63B-4 (which superseded Revision 3 as of August 2025) requires that "Passwords SHALL be salted and hashed using a suitable password hashing scheme." The specific guidance on algorithm selection states: "An approved password hashing scheme published in the latest revision of [SP800-132] or updated NIST guidelines on password hashing schemes SHOULD be used."

NIST defines "approved cryptography" as: "An encryption algorithm, hash function, random bit generator, or similar technique that is Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)-approved or NIST-recommended. Approved algorithms and techniques are either specified or adopted in a FIPS or NIST recommendation."

For federal agencies specifically, NIST requires that "Cryptography used by verifiers operated by or on behalf of federal agencies at AAL1 SHALL be validated to meet the requirements of [FIPS140] Level 1." This requirement is more stringent for higher assurance levels.

Reconciliation of OWASP and NIST Guidance with FIPS Requirements:

The OWASP guidance directly addresses how to reconcile these requirements. OWASP explicitly states: "Since PBKDF2 is permitted by NIST SP 800-63B-4 and has FIPS-140 validated implementations, it should be the preferred algorithm when these are required."

The key to reconciliation is understanding the distinction between:

  • Approved algorithms: These include Argon2id, scrypt, bcrypt, and PBKDF2, which NIST considers acceptable based on current cryptographic standards
  • FIPS-140 validated implementations: Currently, PBKDF2 is the algorithm most widely available in FIPS-140 validated cryptographic modules

Therefore, a team can reconcile these requirements by following this approach:

  1. If FIPS-140 compliance is not required: Use Argon2id as the primary choice (per OWASP and modern cryptographic best practices)
  2. If FIPS-140 compliance is required: Use PBKDF2 with HMAC-SHA-256 and appropriate iteration counts (600,000+), which satisfies all three sets of requirements simultaneously

The NIST reference to "updated NIST guidelines on password hashing schemes" suggests flexibility for algorithms beyond SP800-132's original PBKDF2 focus, but currently PBKDF2 remains the safest choice when FIPS-140 compliance is a hard requirement, as it's the only widely-available option with validated implementations.


{"evidence": [
  {
    "claim": "OWASP recommends Argon2id, scrypt, or bcrypt for password hashing",
    "quote": "Passwords should never be stored in plain text. Instead, they must be protected using strong, slow hashing algorithms such as Argon2id, bcrypt, or PBKDF2.",
    "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "OWASP's specific recommendations for Argon2id",
    "quote": "Use Argon2id with a minimum configuration of 19 MiB of memory, an iteration count of 2, and 1 degree of parallelism.",
    "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "OWASP recommends PBKDF2 for FIPS-140 compliance",
    "quote": "If FIPS-140 compliance is required, use PBKDF2 with a work factor of 600,000 or more and set with an internal hash function of HMAC-SHA-256.",
    "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "NIST SP 800-63B-4 requires passwords to be salted and hashed",
    "quote": "Passwords SHALL be salted and hashed using a suitable password hashing scheme.",
    "url": "https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "NIST SP 800-63B-4 references approved password hashing schemes",
    "quote": "An approved password hashing scheme published in the latest revision of [SP800-132] or updated NIST guidelines on password hashing schemes SHOULD be used.",
    "url": "https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "NIST defines approved cryptography as FIPS-approved or NIST-recommended algorithms",
    "quote": "approved cryptography: An encryption algorithm, hash function, random bit generator, or similar technique that is Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)-approved or NIST-recommended. Approved algorithms and techniques are either specified or adopted in a FIPS or NIST recommendation.",
    "url": "https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "NIST requires federal agency verifiers to use FIPS-140 Level 1 validated cryptography",
    "quote": "Cryptography used by verifiers operated by or on behalf of federal agencies at AAL1 SHALL be validated to meet the requirements of [FIPS140] Level 1.",
    "url": "https://pages.nist.gov/800-63-4/sp800-63b.html"
  },
  {
    "claim": "OWASP states that PBKDF2 is the preferred algorithm when both NIST SP 800-63B-4 and FIPS-140 compliance are required",
    "quote": "Since PBKDF2 is permitted by NIST SP 800-63B-4 and has FIPS-140 validated implementations, it should be the preferred algorithm when these are required.",
    "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Password_Storage_Cheat_Sheet.html"
  }
]}

Provenance of the numbers on this page

run set
scaffold-or-scale-v1
models
Haiku 4.5, Sonnet 5.5, Opus 5.5
effort
high
repeats
2
fixtures
replay
runs
900 / 900
strategy cost
$354.44
judge cost
$9.19
wall clock
9h 48m
git
fce5807b2d

Cost excludes judge calls, which are tracked separately so a scoring model never flatters or penalises an architecture. Every figure on this site is read from results/ at build time.