Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 01:21:49 +0100 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Format name changes On 03/20/2013 11:53 PM, Frank Dittrich wrote: > On 03/20/2013 11:17 PM, magnum wrote: >> We should fix benchmark-unify accordingly (and there may be more needed in that one). > > I'll have a look at the differences compared to jumbo-7 and adjust > benchmark-unify, but not right now (probably tomorrow). I compared jumbo-7 and unstable-jumbo, but not for GPU formats. (I'll have to to that on bull.) Already taken care of in benchmark-unify: < dynamic_38 dynamic_38: sha1($s.sha1($s.($p))) (Wolt3BB) > dynamic_38 dynamic_38: sha1($s.sha1($s.sha1($p))) (Wolt3BB) < odf ODF SHA-1 Blowfish > odf ODF SHA-1 Blowfish / SHA-256 AES < office Office 2007/2010 SHA-1/AES > office Office 2007/2010 (SHA-1) / 2013 (SHA-512), with AES < pdf PDF MD5 RC4 > pdf PDF MD5 SHA-2 RC4 / AES Should some of these, e.g., the "2013 (SHA-512)" be moved into a separate format, even if the implementation remains in the same source file? Is it really right to map "Office 2007/2010 SHA-1/AES" to "Office 2007/2010 (SHA-1) / 2013 (SHA-512), with AES"? Format names that differ and haven't been addressed in benchmark-unify: < mozilla Mozilla SHA-1 3DES > mozilla Mozilla (key3.db) SHA-1 3DES These formats have been added after jumbo-7 was released: -#define FORMAT_NAME "SXC SHA-1 Blowfish" +#define FORMAT_NAME "Staroffice SXC SHA-1 Blowfish" -#define FORMAT_NAME "pfx" +#define FORMAT_NAME "PKCS12 (.pfx, .p12)" Should I map the old names to the new ones anyway? 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.