[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 08:36:12 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: SSHA-512 supported?
On 14 Feb, 2013, at 3:26 , Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@...il.com> wrote:
> On 13 February 2013 15:06, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
>> Excerpt:
>>> If the left brace ( { ) is the first character of the value that the Salt parameter specifies, then the Loadable Password Algorithm (LPA) uses the name that is specified within the braces ( {} ). A set of salt characters follows the LPA name and ends with a dollar sign ($). The length of the salt character depends on the specified LPA. The following example shows a possible value for the SMD5 LPA that the Salt parameter specifies:
>>> {SMD5}JVDbGx8K$
>>
>>
>> So the same tests written in C should work. Jon, can you compile a trivial C program on that box? I mean, is there a compiler available?
>>
>> magnum
>
>
> * To generate smd5 password hash compatible to standard salted MD5,
> * add the following option line for smd5 stanza.
> * lpa_options = std_hash=true
> *
> * Note : password hash generated with this option won't be compatible with
> * hash generated without this option.
> *
>
> It would be interesting to see what format the strings take when this
> option is set also. That might give a better version to look for.
Yes I saw that in some documentation. I can think of two alternatives with very different outcome: Normal crypt-MD5 and RFC 3112... and I tend to think it's actually the latter.
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.
