Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:16:09 +0530 From: Sayantan Datta <std2048@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: descrypt-opencl "section 0" fix On 10/30/13, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: > On 2013-10-29 18:16, magnum wrote: >> On 2013-10-29 15:23, Solar Designer wrote: >>> descrypt-opencl was failing to crack some of the hashes the correct >>> candidate passwords for which appeared in indices 0 to 31. >> >>> The attached patch attempts to and appears to correct this. At least my >>> tests pass now. Note that while I am patching both instances of the >>> code, I think I have tested only one of them. >> >> Committed. I'll investigate if we can enhance the Test Suite in some way. > > Sayantan, > > These changes in 0c2259b as well as other changes in 1c5e1e5 has not > been merged to the bleeding-mask branch because of conflicts. You get to > do that. BTW I'm really growing tired of maintaining bleeding-mask, > nothing seems to happen there anyway? > > magnum > > > I didn't had much free time lately, so there wasn't much progress in the bleeding-mask branch, As you mentioned earlier CPU mask mode is slower than incremental mode, I'll work on that. Also what are our expectations with bleeding-mask ? Do we want to release it as jumbo someday ? Regards, Sayantan
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.