Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 03:49:32 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: New self-test for maximum length On 29 Dec, 2012, at 18:09 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:23 PM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: >> I just threw this in with devastating results: >> >> commit f49d2c56531de71da2a03c0e28c8bc939cce376b >> Author: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> >> Date: Sat Dec 29 17:25:46 2012 +0100 >> >> formats.c: Add a self-test that puts maximum length candidates in all >> buffer positions and then read them back to verify. This finds incorrect >> claims of PLAINTEXT_SIZE as well as most kinds of key buffer over-runs. >> It found 15 problematic formats right away. >> >> I have no idea why I did not get the idea long ago. Unlike the "valid() killer" test that is only active with -DDEBUG, this one doesn't seem prone to segfault so it's always active. This is the current results on my 64-bit machine: >> 15 out of 198 tests have FAILED > > Surprisingly most of my formats passed. I got scared when I did a "git > pull" and saw the commit message. Unfortunately things get worse if you build with OMP. The test is more effective with more than one keys per crypt(). Not that I have seen any more of your formats yet, it segfaults on IPB so the rest are not tested with a --test=0 run. We may have a lot to do. I'll keep focusing on OpenCL formats for now. 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.