|
Message-ID: <20150814134351.GA26772@openwall.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:43:51 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: auditing our use of FMT_* flags (was: more robustness) On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 09:12:51PM +0800, Kai Zhao wrote: > Are the comments ok ? > > static struct fmt_tests tests[] = { > +/* > + * The following two test vectors: "USER" and "service" are case-insensitive > + */ > {"$V$9AYXUd5LfDy-aj48Vj54P-----", "USER"}, > {"$V$p1UQjRZKulr-Z25g5lJ-------", "service"}, > +/* > + * The following one test vectors: "President#44" is case-sensitive, so this > + * format should set FMT_CASE > + */ > {"$V$S44zI913bBx-UJrcFSC------D", "President#44"}, > {NULL} > }; Mostly yes, but the setting of FMT_CASE isn't because of the test vectors - it is because the format in fact supports case-sensitive passwords with some of its supported hashes. Even if we omitted that one test vector, we would still need to set FMT_CASE. As such, the comment is slightly misleading. So I think you need 3 separate comments (with only two of them being about the test vectors), not two. Also, s/one test vectors/one test vector/ Thanks, Alexander
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.