Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:46:05 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: OpenCL vs Test Suite

On 01/27/2012 12:29 AM, jfoug wrote:
> Many of these 'may not' be problems.  What they often are, is the format has
> a limitation of length of password that is 'able' to be tried.
> 
> That is fully acceptable.  If the format only handles words up to 18 bytes,
> and there are 50 of them that are 19 to 32 in there, then expect them to
> fail.

True, I did not notice some formats have a lower max size than SSE2
ones. Hopefully, some of the formats are OK! But ssha-opencl is not :)

> However, one HUGE issue that has been shown within the test suite, is
> many formats had problems where they do have a max password, but do not
> control the words that were being sent in, and some very long lines would
> smash candidates after them.

This should not be a problem, because John will truncate to the reported
PLAINTEXT_LENGTH before serving candidates. We did have a lot of
problems like that, but only for Unicode/UTF-16 formats where we have to
report a longer max length to take (possible) multibytes in account.

OTOH, if a format actually does not handle the length it reports, this
will happen and it can give very misleading sympthoms.

> So, just because the ts shows 'FAILED', a user / developer (usually the ts
> would first need to be used by the developer to make sure his code is clean
> and working), would still need to diagnose, if the TS was going properly or
> not.

Yes. I often just use the input files and wordlists included in the TS,
but run manual tests. Then I can compare the potfile with the infile and
see what lines were failing.

magnum

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ