Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 22:34:13 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: mscash2: CPU and GPU formats disagree about canonical hash representation (and use different test vectors) On 08/02/2012 10:21 PM, magnum wrote: > On 2012-08-02 22:08, Frank Dittrich wrote: > This (or a variation) has been mentioned before. I suggest that [new] > GPU formats re-use old proven CPU formats' valid(), prepare(), split() > and other such functions, as well as the test vectors, as-is. At least > until there's a reason not to. In this case I believe the CPU format > evolved in parallel with the GPU ones, and we did not have git so the > "templates" was ancient. Hopefully the same would not happen again. May be there is a reason do add different test cases or to skip some, I don't know. There are other differences between CPU, opencl and cuda for mscash2. Implementation: CPU opencl cuda Max. password length in bytes: 27 31 27 Honours --encoding=name: yes no no Binary size 16 4 16 Salt size: 48 24 84 Binary size difference might be irrelevant. --encoding=name support probably means, the CPU format will overwrite some test vectors when invoked with --encoding= If Opencl has a test case with a 31 bytes long password, it can obviously not be used by the other two implementations. And the salt different size also puzzles me: Is the CPU size exactly twice the opencl size because it supports UTF-16 encoded user names with 24 characters? And why does cuda support salt size 48? Frank
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.