Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 21:19:20 +0100
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: New self-test for maximum length

On 1 Jan, 2013, at 19:03 , magnum <> wrote:
> I re-worked the max-length test a little. It now does call crypt_all() but when used with a many-keys format, it does not really add a call but uses one that would happen anyway. So no slow down for GPU formats.
> Anyway, the test now better reflects real-life use and should produce no false negatives. For some reason, I now get a few new problems:
> Benchmarking: dynamic_1003 md5(md5($p).md5($p)) [32/64 64x2 (MD5_Body)]... FAILED (get_hash[1](1))
> Benchmarking: MS SQL SHA-1 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 8x]... FAILED (get_hash[0](1))
> Benchmarking: Oracle 11g SHA-1 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 8x]... FAILED (get_hash[0](1))
> Benchmarking: HMAC MD5 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 12x]... FAILED (cmp_all(2))
> Benchmarking: HMAC SHA-1 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 8x]... FAILED (cmp_all(2))
> 5 out of 199 tests have FAILED
> I'll look into these, it still might be some unpredicted side-effect of the self-test.

All gone, with further fixes to the self-test. Some formats depend on set_key() having been called for all N keys before crypt_all(N) is called.


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.