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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:00:38 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: submitters on discussions list

JP, all -

Can/should we require/ensure that all PHC submitters are subscribed to
the discussions list?  I'd like to be providing feedback on submissions
by simply posting in here, but for some of the submissions I am not sure
if their authors are in here.

Not being in here to comment would put their submissions at a
disadvantage anyway, so maybe we should just discuss in here and assume
that if the authors haven't subscribed, the scheme will probably not
make it into the shortlist of finalists? ;-)  This feels harsh, though,
and it could result in otherwise good schemes being thrown out on a
misunderstanding.  On the other hand, requiring people to be on a
discussion mailing list is not great (we didn't list it among
requirements for PHC submitters), whereas using private e-mail or CC'ing
them is not perfect either.

Thoughts?  Maybe I am imagining this issue, and you can simply check and
tell us that all of the submitters are already subscribed?

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists