Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 04:23:46 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: SSHA-512 supported? On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 04:15:26AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:05:29PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > I am thinking that their base64 transformation is not the same as that > > used by the other OS crypts but is using the old crypt style base64 > > with different letters and a slightly different order of > > transformation. > > Doesn't sha512crypt use the exact same kind of base 64 encoding that the > traditional DES crypt did? The character set and the order of > characters is certainly the same. Does the encoding differ in some > other way? > > So far, I am only aware of bcrypt using its own subtly different > encoding. I thought SHA-crypt used the traditional encoding. No? Also note that we have two samples with consecutive dots, which means zeroes in both traditional crypt from late 1970s and SHA-crypt. Thus, even if the encoding differed in some other subtle way, we'd immediately spot a sequence of dots near the correct place. In the "test" sample, there are three dots at the end - that's 18 bits. Even with a slightly different encoding scheme, we'd probably see at least two dots in a row. So your theory does not hold. Alexander
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.