[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51478297.4000500@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 18:09:43 -0300
From: Claudio André <claudioandre.br@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: FMT_SPLIT_UNIFIES_CASE
Em 18-03-2013 15:05, magnum escreveu:
>>
>> Hi, if you are having problems looking at previous patches (above), i attach a new one (easier to deal but might harder to follow/understand).
>>
>> commit (7ac5b370) and i'm not sure if it is the right thing to do.
> Do you mean the FMT_SPLIT_UNIFIES_CASE? That flag should be set if (and only if) your format has a split() that returns the ciphertext with case unified (to lower or upper, I think we normally use lower). So the raw format with hex encoding could/should unify case while the Cisco version must not do that (since it would ruin the base64).
>
> The reason for unifying is so John can recognize that a hex hash of DEAD3137CAFE is cracked even though the pot file has it as dead3137cafe.
>
> magnum
Magnum, I'm not using it inside Cisco, only on raw. In order to
understand why I have doubts, take a look at the attached file. All of
them have a proper split().
Ok, I know, my name is also in the list.
Thanks for the clarification.
View attachment "ver" of type "text/plain" (2374 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.
