Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:08:24 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Dupe crack detection On 2014-06-01 16:56, magnum wrote: > And back to that "dupe within a batch": Do we not have any such > suppression? I always thought we had, but we're seeing "1501 cracked out > of 1500" in a test case. I think I can answer this half of the question myself: It's not needed. If we have dupe input candidates, even within a batch of keys, the "first" crack will remove the hash from the list so the "second" should not pass cmp_one(). magnum
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.