Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 21:07:49 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank.dittrich@...lbox.org> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: get_binary_*() and get_hash_*() methods On 05/05/2015 08:53 PM, Aleksey Cherepanov wrote: > Formats provide get_binary_[0-6]() and get_hash_[0-6]() methods to > john. If the algo in them is the same then it is possible to construct > default cmp_all function. Are they used this way? Are they required to > have the same algo? If so, why is not there default cmp_all() based on > them? I think many formats could just use fmt_default_binary_hash_0 - fmt_default_binary_hash_6. Only formats which know that their hashes have a non-random distribution in (certain parts of) their hashes should need to implement their own binary_hash_[0-6]. But I think fmt_default_binary_hash_0 - fmt_default_binary_hash_6 are jumbo specific, they don't exist in core. But fmt_default_salt_hash just returns 0 (which is OK for saltless hashes). So, we would need other "default" implementations for salt_hash_[0-6]. 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.