[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140102075542.CX61C.306743.imail@fed1rmwml213>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 7:55:42 -0500
From: <jfoug@....net>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: dynamic_2000 - dynamic_2014
---- Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote:
> Apparently, formats dynamic_2000 - dynamic_2014, defined in
> run/dynamic_flat_sse_formats.conf re-implement dynamic_0 - dynamic_14.
>
> These formats are slower, but allow longer passwords.
>
> Unfortunately, these formats use different canonical hash
> representations than the dynamic_0 - dynamic_14 formats.
> Probably this means, dynamic_2000 will not recognize cracked dynamic_0
> hashes in the pot file, and vice versa.
>
> Is there an easy way to avoid this,
This is a very good point frank. I think we can do this by adding an 'array' of signatures to the dyna format. Right now, there is a single number, that gets used to check for validity strings. But if it were an array, then dyna_2002 would look for dyna_2 or dyna_2002 and accept both of them.
There are some caveats here (there always are). Off the top of my head, you will end up with having something be in dyna_2 format, get cracked by dyna_2002, and then get written out as dyna_2002. So there are some nuances that may have to be addressed, other than simply passing the valid check. This is not a trivial request, but it is not rocket science either.
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.
