[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20261112033742.GG5716@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 22:37:42 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@...c17.net>,
Alejandro Colomar <alx+linux-man@...nel.org>,
Alejandro Colomar <alx@...nel.org>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
libc-alpha@...rceware.org, Walter Harms <wharms@....de>,
~hallyn/shadow@...ts.sr.ht, musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v1] man/man3/crypt.3: These functions accept
many algorithms, not only DES
On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 04:29:29AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2026-11-11 21:53:39 -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > That's the whole reason '$' was chosen: POSIX doesn't define the
> > behavior (since a "shall" is violated) so the implementation is free
> > to define a behavior here. The behaviors for the portable base64
> > character set documented in POSIX uses only 2 characters as salt
> > (insufficient) and the common agreed-upon definition for how they are
> > used is as salt for the classic DES-based password hash.
>
> But the behavior is completely out of scope of POSIX.
Yes. And that's allowed because POSIX does not define the behavior but
leaves it undefined. I'm not sure if you're objecting to something
here or questioning how it should be documented or something else..?
Rich
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.
