[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <op.x3g1uqon3qx92w@mom-laptop>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:36:16 -0500
From: "jfoug@....net" <jfoug@....net>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: phpass on CPU, aka dynamic_17
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:13:15 -0500, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
wrote:
> magnum, Jim, Lei -
>
> Maybe we should simply (re-)create a separate phpass format, not
> building upon the dynamic formats framework? IIRC, we had one before.
I have known about this issue a while, ever since the choice was made to
consider all of dynamic to be non-OMP scalible. The problem with dynamic
is that all format SHARE the same code, and since each thread can be at
any point within running script for a range of values, then each of the
sub functions within dyna also has to be supportive of OMP. So it is
pretty much an all or nothing.
> Maybe we should simply (re-)create a separate phpass format
This is probably the correct way to proceed, and make sure that format can
also prepare/split any $dynamic_17$ back into it's native hash type.
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.
