Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 7:55:42 -0500 From: <jfoug@....net> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: dynamic_2000 - dynamic_2014 ---- Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote: > Apparently, formats dynamic_2000 - dynamic_2014, defined in > run/dynamic_flat_sse_formats.conf re-implement dynamic_0 - dynamic_14. > > These formats are slower, but allow longer passwords. > > Unfortunately, these formats use different canonical hash > representations than the dynamic_0 - dynamic_14 formats. > Probably this means, dynamic_2000 will not recognize cracked dynamic_0 > hashes in the pot file, and vice versa. > > Is there an easy way to avoid this, This is a very good point frank. I think we can do this by adding an 'array' of signatures to the dyna format. Right now, there is a single number, that gets used to check for validity strings. But if it were an array, then dyna_2002 would look for dyna_2 or dyna_2002 and accept both of them. There are some caveats here (there always are). Off the top of my head, you will end up with having something be in dyna_2 format, get cracked by dyna_2002, and then get written out as dyna_2002. So there are some nuances that may have to be addressed, other than simply passing the valid check. This is not a trivial request, but it is not rocket science either.
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.