Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:26:58 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: gpg2john -> false positive -> how to exclude? On 23 Dec, 2012, at 15:02 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 7:19 PM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: >> On 23 Dec, 2012, at 13:42 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote: >>> I don't plan to commit this change (for now). I am trying to find the >>> root cause of the problem. >>> >>> The problem is that I have not been able to generate a DSA key which >>> generates false positives. >> >> Me neither. All keys I produce seem to get a 'datalen' of 42, whereas Seb's one has 24. I wonder why? What is that data and why is his data shorter? > > Very strange. Passware says that the file is "slightly damaged". > However, pgpdump doesn't complain about the file. > >> BTW I just noticed if you have several keys in secring.gpg, gpg2john will only extract one of them, and give no notice about there being more. This could be improved. > > Yes. Will a warning suffice? We can ask the user to use standard > programs to separate out the keys first. That would be OK, but ideally it should parse all keys it finds. BTW, is it not possible to extract keywords to put in the GECOS fields? Like name, email address and comments. They might be worth a whole lot in Single mode. Alternatively, you could use the email address or the name for the username field instead of the secring file name. 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.