[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <017101cd6502$1eab5fa0$5c021ee0$@net>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:26:40 -0500
From: "jfoug" <jfoug@....net>
To: <john-dev@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: RE: --list=format-details (was: Pwsafe, is our algorithm right?)
>From: Frank Dittrich [mailto:frank_dittrich@...mail.com]
>On 07/18/2012 03:22 PM, jfoug wrote:
>> I really need to
>> see if I can have the TS auth-detect and correct for this, now that
>> the plaintextlen is in the -list=format-all-details
>
>--list=format-all-details is intended for humans.
>If you want to parse it automatically, I suggest you use --list=format-
>details.
I simply listed 'what' I was planning on doing in the TS at some time. I
almost certainly would have used this method.
You list that things only get appended, but that is not 100% true on the
--list=format-all-details, since you split the flags. New flag bits would
be appended to the flags part of the message, and new details (non flags),
would be appended to the end of the list. On the --list=format-details,
the flags value would simply have a new bit in it, when a new flag is added.
This was recently seen with the new flag: FMT_DYNAMIC
>BTW: I hoped you would reply to my mail
>
>http://openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2012/07/16/27
>
>Your commit
>commit 61cea42f979eb07284afc099550f90ae50bb858a
>Author: JimF <jfoug@....net>
>Date: Mon Jul 9 11:56:31 2012 +0200
>
> Jumbo-7RC-JimF-fixes.diff
>
>reverted my correction that fixed the --list=format-details output for
>the salt length of dynamic formats in all three trees.
Whatever I did, had problems, and magnum cleaned things up. I had committed
to the wrong branch (bleeding). I do not feel comfortable enough in how to
properly get this fixed. It will have to wait until Magnum returns.
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.
