phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests

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: <546100D8.20904@bindshell.nl>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:15:52 -0800
From: epixoip <epixoip@...dshell.nl>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Another PHC candidates "mechanical" tests

On 11/10/2014 12:22 AM, Milan Broz wrote:
> (and Pufferfish if not fixed to produce raw output)
> (I run this mainly to find apparent mistakes like that Pufferfish hexa encoding.)

> The Pufferfish mistake in PHS() implementation (which includes even
buffer overflow) just
> underlines that these trivial tests could be useful to find serious
problems.

Just for clarification, there is no requirement for PHS() to return raw
output, and you created the bug & subsequent buffer overflow in PHS()
with a half-baked patch.

Furthermore, PHS() is merely the wrapper for the sake of this contest.
The 'official' interface for the reference implemenation is pufferfish().