Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 13:46:17 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: RACF format On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 03:06:06PM +0530, Dhiru Kholia wrote: > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > > racf_fmt_plug.c needs a proper valid(), not just a check for $racf$. > > This problems exists in lot of my formats. I am secretly waiting for > Frank to send the patches ;) Don't wait. Patch. > Modern RACF versions can use long (14 - 100) passphrases. It would be > great if someone could post some sample hashes. I guess you might have better luck if you ask on john-users. You may also try asking here: http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/wgtp3/is_it_really_true_that_acf2racf_only_support_8/ When you add support for the newer hash types, I think they should be a separate format - well, or we'd need Short/Long separation for the benchmarks like we do for AFS, and then it'd be trickier to use bitslice DES for the DES-based flavor. 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.