[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7269f2780eaa7fe665535f6c1a6d9b0e@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:18:43 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Should several more hash formats be changed from using
hex to base64 before releasing unstable and bleeding?
On 2014-01-09 00:41, Frank Dittrich wrote:
> The only format with extra long hashes using base64 is wpapsk.
> OK, these are longer than 2000 characters even with base64 encoding. Due
> to a huge number of '.' characters, we could probably make the hashes
> smaller by adding compression;)
We use the .hccap format HashCat introduced, so we can't change it. At
least all those dots make it somewhat readable compared to the same
amount of hex data.
I like using hex for hashes but I think we should always use Base64 for
data longer than, say, 2048 bits/512 bytes for new formats. Changing old
formats is less important and no RoI.
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.
