Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 16:16:38 -0500 From: "jfoug" <jfoug@....net> To: <john-dev@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: RE: vowels/consonants >From: RB [mailto:aoz.syn@...il.com] > >Peanut gallery comment here, Peanut gallery, lol. Both magnum and I feel that way a lot, dealing with specifications and writings, without always have someone within the language knowledge. >but the code path and error potential for >treating "fuzzy" vowels differently based on codepage may not be a >sufficient tradeoff for the speed gain. My off-the-cuff guess is that >just placing dual-use letters in both lists may not be perfectly >accurate but could save a lot of unnecessary complexity. I agree with this. We already SMASH the language with the rules, trying to coerce sounds and 'likely' information out of something that a person has used as their password, where they typed things in they could remember, but doing such as to 'hide' from dictionary scanning, by typing in non-words. In a similar thought line, how many English books list using a 1 for I, or 3 for E? However, we have found that this IS something very beneficial to do. Likewise, adding Y/y to be both a 'v' and 'c' rule type, simply means that it may catch more non-words (but close words) users have used for their passphrase. Jim.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ