[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111218195956.GA2301@openwall.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:59:56 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Test results for 179 jumbo-4
Jim,
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 01:41:27PM -0600, JimF wrote:
> That patch may have been minor enough to skip. But the patch I did last night is not. The fix to hmacmd5. It is failing on SSE2i. It will benchmark test just fine, but when you run it with 'real' data it will fail badly. It will only crack hashes if the password index is within PARA=1. If PARA is more than that, then only the first MMX_COEF limbs will crack, the others will fail, due to the cmp function not properly working past the first block of PARAs.
>
> There is a patch on the wiki, 0002. Without that patch, PARA=2 is only 50% likely to find a password, and PARA=3 is only 1/3 likely. Thus, without patch 0002, this format is pretty poor, on any SSE2i build (which includes most 64 bit builds)
That's nasty, but I am going to proceed to announce -jumbo-5 now. I've
just submitted an announcement to Freecode (ex-Freshmeat). I can't
afford to postpone that and go back to making revised -jumbo releases now.
The Windows build was pretty time-consuming to make (maybe we need to
automate some of this).
It is unrealistic to have a completely bug-free -jumbo, and we'll have a
-jumbo-6 eventually anyway.
Thanks, and sorry.
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.
