Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 07:04:38 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: John 1.7.7-jumbo-5 On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:14:02PM -0500, JFoug wrote: > New formats: mskrb5 (magnum), rawMD5unicode (magnum), salted_sha1 (Simon > ???, this one is nsldaps, but using SSE2i). This salted_sha1 vs. ssha vs. openssha thing is very confusing. I think salted_sha1 needs to be renamed. Also, salted_sha1_fmt.c lacks a copyright and license statement. > SSE intrisics also added to raw-md4, raw-sha1, and raw-md5 (through thin > format to md5_gen(0)). Intrinsics also used in other formats (Simon). Not confirmed regarding raw-md4. > Fixed REQ_ALIGN crash problems in: HDAA, MSCHAPv2, NETLM, NETLMv2, > NETNTLM, NETNTLMv2, NSLDAPS, NSLDAP, OPENLDAPS, mscash, mscashv2, mssql, > mssql05, oracle, raw-md4 Note, some crash problems existed in Jumbo-1, > and some were needed due to J1->J5 performance changes, and -utf8 support. > (JimF) You're patching rawMD4_fmt.c's get_binary() to have its static output buffer machine word aligned. However, I was under impression that no code in JtR required such alignment of binary()'s output buffer. Was I wrong, or has something changed, introducing this requirement? ...Oh, it just occurred to me that fmt_self_test() directly passes binary()'s return value to binary_hash() and cmp_*() functions. If it's the only place where we have this requirement, then maybe it should be patched (to make a copy) instead of complicating all formats? > Changed NT's asm code (x86_sse.S) to properly work with UTF-8. (Alain > Espinosa ????) What's the performance impact for non-UTF-8? (I'd expect 1% or so.) > Added new rules for is binary, and reject if (if not) -utf8 used. What's this? Is it just about the new rule reject flags (-u and -U) or something else? Thanks, Alexander
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.