[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:14:19 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: External node distribution (call for help)
On 2013-09-26 02:37, Solar Designer wrote:
>> BUT what if the session was started on core
>> John, and "seq" wrapped around it's 32 bits once or several times? And
>> only then we resume it using the new code... and let's say our number of
>> nodes is a prime... Would this mean our conversion might not be valid?
>> Or can I totaly ignore such wrapping? I haven't figured that out yet %-)
>
> Oh, that. I agree that you need to give this some thought - perhaps
> after having reimplemented core wordlist.c's approach in external.c, so
> that you can see what exactly will be happening. And test it, too.
Not sure what approach you mean. The my_words & their_words are an
approach from wordlist.c but in that case we have a proper line number
too (much like seq) and I hoped to avoid incrementing that. Hmm but I
see this now:
/* Restored session. line_number is right after a word we've actually
used. */
...
/* We assume that line_number is at the beginning of other nodes' block */
Does this apply to external mode too? I mean, can I assume that I am at
the start of a full "their_words" block after resuming? How/why is that?
I can't see why that would be a safe assumption. A fix_state() seems to
happen right before a clear_keys and if "we" are several nodes (as in
-node:1-7/10) that could be in the middle of my_words.
magnum
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.
