[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130209002346.GA18482@openwall.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 04:23:46 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: SSHA-512 supported?
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 04:15:26AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:05:29PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > I am thinking that their base64 transformation is not the same as that
> > used by the other OS crypts but is using the old crypt style base64
> > with different letters and a slightly different order of
> > transformation.
>
> Doesn't sha512crypt use the exact same kind of base 64 encoding that the
> traditional DES crypt did? The character set and the order of
> characters is certainly the same. Does the encoding differ in some
> other way?
>
> So far, I am only aware of bcrypt using its own subtly different
> encoding. I thought SHA-crypt used the traditional encoding. No?
Also note that we have two samples with consecutive dots, which means
zeroes in both traditional crypt from late 1970s and SHA-crypt. Thus,
even if the encoding differed in some other subtle way, we'd immediately
spot a sequence of dots near the correct place. In the "test" sample,
there are three dots at the end - that's 18 bits. Even with a slightly
different encoding scheme, we'd probably see at least two dots in a row.
So your theory does not hold.
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.
