phc-discussions - RE: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

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]

Message-ID: <001f01ce0e49$f7742ab0$e65c8010$@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:36:45 -0800
From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@....org>
To: <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

@Larry,

That makes perfect sense to me but I don't understand the addendum about
network byte order.

What does network byte order mean in the context of a C Language array in
storage?  Is that the same as ordering in[0], in[1], ..., in[inlen-1] and,
with regard to accepting serial input from a byte stream, the array is
filled with the first arrival at in[0], the second at in[1], etc.?

I assume this is the mapping that is also sensible with regard to how digest
algorithms are specified in terms of storage blocks.  (If there is a
big-/little-endian assumption on framing these into multi-byte logical
words, that is for the interior of the implementation to deal with, in my
understanding.)

Is there something that I am missing in what you are saying?

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Bugbee [mailto:bugbee@....com] 
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 15:57
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Coding of the in[inlen] array for PHS( )

On Feb 18, 2013, at 3:00 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> In PHS(), we deal with bytes.

+1

...and said bytes/byte strings/byte arrays should be specified to be in
network byte order.