[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c6861e582aa92a5a5e0a03d4583f9d13@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:22:30 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: rawSHA1_LI internals
On 06/08/2012 09:11 AM, magnum wrote:
> BTW Jim, I'm just now comparing rawSHA1_fmt_plug.c and
> rawSHA1_LinkedIn_fmt_plug.c using meld. I notice cmp_all() is unchanged.
> I must be missing something, how can this work? We should only look at
> binary[1] but as far as I can see this is not the case. I know the code
> works, but how!?
>
> Also, I really think half of the self-tests should have the zeroed bits.
Here is a patch that does what I mean. I just don't understand how it
can possibly work without this patch. BTW the new self-tests fails
unless this is done to cmp_all().
magnum
View attachment "0001-raw-sha1_li-self-tests-and-modified-cmp_all.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1761 bytes)
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.
