Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 16:16:34 +0200 (CEST)
From: "Linus Lüssing" <>
Cc: JoMo-Kun <>, magnum <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MSCHAPv2: Add support for
 freeradius-wep-patch challenge/response format

Hi magnum,

> Gesendet: Freitag, 07. September 2012 um 18:14 Uhr
> Von: magnum <>
> An:
> Cc:
> Betreff: Re: [john-dev] [PATCH] MSCHAPv2: Add support for freeradius-wep-patch challenge/response format
> Hi Linus,
> I presume you do not subscribe to the list (you should have said so) and did not see the below message in response to your first patch? I'll be happy to include it in jumbo-unstable git tree as soon as you comply with the below.

Indeed, I didn't see that reply (neither in my inbox nor on the mailing list). And yes, I had first sent the patch without being subscribed and when it didn't appear on the list after a day I did subscribe and resent the patch.

> magnum
> On 4 Sep, 2012, at 22:33 , magnum <> wrote:
> > On 4 Sep, 2012, at 14:38 , Linus Lüssing <> wrote:
> > 
> >> With this patch the MSCHAPv2 challenge can be provided directly instead
> >> of having to provide the username, authenticator challenge and peer
> >> challenge.
> >> 
> >> This makes john usable with the challenge/response format returned by
> >> the FreeRADIUS-WPE patch from the folks.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Linus Lüssing <>
> > 
> > Great! However, your patch fails due to line breaks so please re-post it as an attachment. And while at it, please add your copyright notice to it (please note that the one I have in there is not really good enough, I need to improve that). See

Hmm, weird, never had any line break issues with git-send-email before. But ok, I'll resend it as an attachment, no problem.

For the copyright thingy, I first was under the impression that the whole project and therefore this patch as well were GPLv2 licensed. What is the exact license of MSCHAPv2_fmt_plug.c in john 1.7.9-jumbo-6 then?

I believe I'm not allowed to use any more permissive license for my patch than the original file because my changes contain code from the original file.

I'd be happy to place it under the Creative Commons Zero terms (although I usually prefer GPLv2 for patches like this) but would like to check with the original author of this file first (CC'd).

> > 
> > Given that, I'll include it in git right away unless it gives me problems.

Thanks for having a glance at it and the quick reply, magnum!

> > 
> > magnum
> > 

Cheers, Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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