Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:50:24 -0600
From: "jfoug" <>
To: <>
Subject: RE: md5_gen(0) broken for ages?

I think this will fix it.

In the rawMD5go_fmt.c in the 'init()' function:

 static void rawmd5_init(void)
 	md5_gen_RESET_LINK(&fmt_rawMD5go, Convert(Conv_Buf,
rawmd5_tests[0].ciphertext), "raw-md5");
 	fmt_rawMD5go.methods.binary = rawmd5_binary;
-	fmt_rawMD5go.methods.salt = fmt_default_salt;
+	fmt_rawMD5go.methods.salt = fmt_MD5gen.methods.salt;

NOTE, this may still be an issue that I want to 'correct' in the md5-gen
sources.  I think this should have been done by default. This may be the
first time a non-salted hash has been 'thin linked' to md5-gen.    The
'linkage' should be more transparent, and if non-salted, it should simply
work, by listing the saltlen == 0 when passing in the format structure in
the call to md5_gen_RESET_LINK.

However, the change I listed above, to use the 'salt' method from the
md5_gen format, does get things working, right now.  It will cause the
'thin' rawMD5 to run the same speed as the md5_gen(0), and should be same
speed as it was before in the rawMD5 'thick' format.   Not only in
benchmarks, but also in real running against large input files.


-----Original Message-----
From: Simon [] 
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 4:16 AM
Subject: Re: [john-users] md5_gen(0) broken for ages?

On 25/02/2011 03:46, jfoug wrote:
> I am not sure what exactly is your 'problem' here.  There should be NO
> For md5_gen(0).  It is salt-less 'raw-md5'

This is from my patch that removed raw-md5 and linked it to md5_gen(0).
AFAIK I did the link properly, but as I'm not familiar with the code I
might have failed somewhere. SALT_SIZE is set to 0 ...

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.