[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 13:09:17 -0400
From: <jfoug@....net>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Format writing 101
---- Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote:
> My bad. SIP format was a very quick hack and I never got around to
> fixing it (like I have fixed my other formats). Lot of the code from
> set_salt belongs in get_salt. Also, I think that the whole cracked
> array approach can be removed from the SIP format.
The quick change I did, was to make a structure, that holds the 2 strings (dynamic and static), and the sizes. It does fully contain the string information for each string, they are not simply pointers. However, I put the hash being in the salt, will cause the salt dupe logic to not work.
For this format, 'detection' should be done in the normal way, with binary, binary hash, and with cmp_all/one/exact comparing the binary final result to the binary value returned from binary()
For a lot of the recent formats, they have been SO slow (in computational complexity), that some allocations, a few hash computations here and there within set_salt has not really mattered all that much But for a fast format, it 'really' matters a lot.
Jim.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
