[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <519926D6.6050509@mccme.ru>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:24:06 +0400
From: Alexander Cherepanov <cherepan@...me.ru>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: dynamic_1300 selftest FAILED (get_hash[0](1)) in bleeding
On 2013-05-18 20:53, jfoug@....net wrote:
> ---- Alexander Cherepanov<cherepan@...me.ru> wrote:
>> Sorry, I was not clear enough. I didn't mean to get rid of MGF_SALTED
>> and MGF_USERNAME completely. I thought about eliminating them from
>> dynamic.conf. They can be recomputed internally by dinamic while reading
>> dynamic.conf.
>
> No, I think you were perfectly clear, possibly I was not. The reason
> they are there is because there is SO much complexity within dynamic,
> that they are really needed. If not there, then there has to be some
> pretty complex logic, to try to find out if there should be a salt or
> not. Were any of a couple dozen functions called? Were certain other
> flags set, or some other combination. Also, that logic (which would be
> rather complex), would need to be looked at whenever changes were made
> to the dynamic interface (which does happen).
Probably it could be done in the following way? For every function there
is an int with a combination of flags. When a definition for a format is
read from dynamic.conf each Func= is parsed and corresponding flags are
ORed to result. When all Func= lines are processed the resulting
variable contains combined flags for all functions which supposedly is
exactly flags corresponding to the format.
I know nearly nothing about dynamic so please take it as a wild guess.
--
Alexander Cherepanov
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.
