phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2)

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: <20151006082135.GB8548@openwall.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 11:21:35 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2)

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 10:06:59AM +0200, Kriszti??n Pint??r wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> 
> >> I'm pretty sure any aggressive enough compiler will do these. Cf. http://goo.gl/tYzkvD
> > Curiously, for all compilers currently available on
> 
> i'm pretty sure that all the discussion about current compilers are
> totally irrelevant if you plan to deliver standards for the upcoming
> decades.

The discussion about current compilers is relevant in that even current
compilers already effectively disallow use of those broken constructions,
in case anyone still was not convinced.  So they work to prove a point.

Alexander