|
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP1534420F1521E4B7033D5BDFDE60@phx.gbl> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 07:21:26 +0200 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Is saving 2 bytes per salt worth the effort? On 06/28/2012 06:55 AM, Dhiru Kholia wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Frank Dittrich > <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote: >> diff --git a/src/episerver_fmt_plug.c b/src/episerver_fmt_plug.c >> index 4b46ffc..d89a0d7 100644 >> --- a/src/episerver_fmt_plug.c >> +++ b/src/episerver_fmt_plug.c >> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ static ARCH_WORD_32 (*crypt_out)[BINARY_SIZE / >> sizeof(ARCH_WORD_32)]; >> >> static struct custom_salt { >> int version; > > "int version" can be changes to "char version". Even more savings! That was my second idea: >> Or should we rather use the last 2 bytes to store the version info after >> base64 decoding? But this was more a general question, not a suggestion to do it prior to jumbo-6. (Otherwise I would have appended a patch.) Frank
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.