Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 00:52:14 +0530 From: Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: A few questions regarding the newly added BLAKE2 format On Wednesday 02 January 2013 12:37 AM, Frank Dittrich wrote: > I commented on the recent commit "Add support for BLAKE2 hash function > (https://blake2.net/)", 2620ccc0394051a2e34ac4873fb905d2af18f9ce, on > github, but magnum suggested to take this discussion to john-dev or > john-users, so here we go: > > Is BLAKE2 really used as a password hash algorithm? If so, where? JtR is getting ready for future hashing schemes ;). Well hashcat recently did Keccak support which isn't used anywhere (you could argue that it is the official SHA3 though). > Should we really allow newly added formats to treat ambiguous hashes as > valid? > The hash > 4245af08b46fbb290222ab8a68613621d92ce78577152d712467742417ebc1153668f1c9e1ec1e152a32a9c242dc686d175e087906377f0c483c5be2cb68953e > is considered as valid by raw-sha512 and more than 20 dynamic formats. > I don't like "raw" hashes (hashes without leading FORMAT_TAG) much. If magnum agrees, I can remove support for them from BLAKE2 format. Dhiru
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.