Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 20:39:22 +0200 From: magnum <rawsmooth@...dband.net> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Ideas for jumbo-6 On 2011-05-23 20:08, jfoug wrote: >> From: magnum To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com >> We should strive to keep this as simple as possible though so I guess >> number 2 is the way to go. But just maybe we could want that >> thin-over-thick thing hacked in? Not that I know how we would tell them >> apart in a canonical way. > > Well, I will be working on thin formats. I was planning on using > *_thin_plugfmt.c for them, as a 'naming' standard. Thus, we 'could' get > tricky. However, is the thin always preferred? I would guess not. I would > think the thin would be a standard install, but then a user has a problem > with thin, and tries to revert back to thick, by coping a thick format from > somewhere (possibly a repository on the wiki of the 'old' thick formats). > Being a user and not realizing how john is built, it now fails (or continues > to run with the thin format). Just poking out a hypothetical to keep the > thoughts flowing. True. And maybe we first need to establish this: How do we treat all old Jumbo-formats whenever we release this? 1) Only mskrb5 and salted-sha formats (and possibly the pending formats on the wiki) converted to plugin formats, showing the way. The rest is left as-is in Makefile & john.c (and with their current file names). The old Jumbo formats can be migrated one by one or a bunch at a time whenever revised for other reasons. 2) ALL Jumbo (or non-core) formats (md5-gen counts as core) converted to plugin formats. I vote for option 2. Regardless of which option we choose, all future formats are supposed to be written as plugins and named *_plugfmt.c 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.