[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:08:24 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Dupe crack detection
On 2014-06-01 16:56, magnum wrote:
> And back to that "dupe within a batch": Do we not have any such
> suppression? I always thought we had, but we're seeing "1501 cracked out
> of 1500" in a test case.
I think I can answer this half of the question myself: It's not needed.
If we have dupe input candidates, even within a batch of keys, the
"first" crack will remove the hash from the list so the "second" should
not pass cmp_one().
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.
