Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:01:59 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: post 1.7.8-jumbo-7 changes summary Works like a champ now! This means we have no unresolved issues I know of, with this patch set. magnum 2011-11-08 16:24, jfoug wrote: > I have a v3 patch out. It is a combination of the original code, and the new > flag within the format structure 'private' blob. > > The original code was needed for a non-specific running (such as -test=0). > The flag is needed for 'specific' running, such as -form=dynamic_29 > > V3 is a full replacement for v2 (or v1). Unpatch the v2 first, then apply > the v3 patch. > > Jim. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: magnum [mailto:john.magnum@...hmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 5:16 PM >> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com >> Subject: Re: [john-dev] post 1.7.8-jumbo-7 changes summary >> >> The original version of the patch segfaulted for me at dynamic_8 >> >> The second version has problems with the thin formats: >> >> $ ../run/john -test=0 | grep FAIL >> Benchmarking: PHPS -- md5(md5($pass).$salt) [SSE2 10x4x3 (intr)]... >> FAILED (get_hash(0)) >> Benchmarking: MediaWiki -- md5($s.'-'.md5($p)) [SSE2 10x4x3 (intr)]... >> FAILED (get_hash(0)) >> Benchmarking: PHPass MD5 [SSE2 2x4x3 (intr)]... FAILED (get_hash(0)) >> Benchmarking: Raw MD5 [SSE2 10x4x3 (intr)]... FAILED (get_hash(0)) >> Benchmarking: md5(unicode($p)) [SSE2 10x4x3 (intr)]... FAILED >> (get_hash(0)) >> 5 out of 104 tests have FAILED >> >> magnum >> >> >> 2011-11-08 00:05, jfoug wrote: >>> The original patch had problems. The problem was likely only going to >> be a >>> performance hit, but a performance hit, none the less. Now, it >> properly >>> does init() once, and make sure it DOES do this init(). There is a - >> v2 of >>> the patch. That version is a replacement for the original simple >> patch. >>> >>> Jim. >>> >>>> From: jfoug [mailto:jfoug@....net] >>>> >>>> Note, there is a new 'fix' for dynamic. Under certain situations, >>>> init() >>>> was not functioning. I had logic that did a short circuit of init(), >> if >>>> the >>>> type did not change. I removed that so that init will always be run. >>>> >>>> This showed up in the last format (highest number, i.e. 29), and >> would >>>> happen if the format was being 'forced' to 29. I think it would also >>>> have >>>> happened, if forced to the highest number within the john.conf >> 'script' >>>> loaded items also, if that one was force set. >>>> >>>> Jim. >>> >>> >>> > > >
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.