phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] PHC status report

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:44:45 +0100
From: Krisztián Pintér <pinterkr@...il.com>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: Re: [PHC] PHC status report


i did. but some people does not take a hint.

general process problem, more precisely the absolute lack of anything
that could be called a process.


Tony Arcieri (at Monday, February 16, 2015, 9:29:25 AM):
> You didn't answer my question.

> Tony Arcieri (at Monday, February 16, 2015, 6:59:00 AM):
>> I have a very candid question for Krisztián Pintér and Somitra Sanadhya:
>> Do you think there's a general process problem with the PHC, or do
>> you think specific candidates were descriminated against?