[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93b8e6c27044f7e70748c5134161c5d3@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:21:00 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: formats that duplicate dynamics
On 15 Mar, 2013, at 18:32 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:36:55AM +0100, magnum wrote:
>> Since a patch is already submitted/accepted to Ettercap, IMO we should just change the filename and format label but leave the tag alone. Changing the tag is not that important. You may picture 'postgre$' as leetspeak :-)
>
> I think we should support both $postgre$ and $postgres$ then, with the
> latter being recommended for use in other tools, etc.
I can't see how a tag name can bother you that much? It's just a file magic, and there is no risk for clashing. You normally neither write it nor look at it: You produce the infile with Ettercap, throw it at John and view the results with -show.
magnum
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.
