Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 02:41:27 +0100 From: magnum <rawsmooth@...dband.net> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: --utf8 option, proof of concept On 03/07/2011 11:02 PM, I wrote: > * I can see a need for a new format property flag, FMT_UNICODE, that > tells that this format use Unicode internally. Actually I think the new format property flag would better be FMT_UTF8, saying "this format will behave differently if you use the --utf8 flag". So it would currently be set for NT in the experimental tree, but not for MSSQL even though the latter do use UTF16 internally. > In particular, a mode that is not yet supporting --utf8 should bail out if you try. Maybe to get there we need both flags? MSSQL would have FMT_UNICODE but not FMT_UTF8, so John could respond that --utf8 is not yet supported. But if a format does not have FMT_UNICODE (like FreeBSD-MD5), the --utf8 flag is valid, potentially having effect on rules (still, FreeBSD-MD5 should not have FMT_UTF8 set as the format itself does not behave differently). This could also be used for testing, eg. "john -test -utf8" could do utf8 benchmarks for all applicable formats. 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.