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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:40:19 +0000
From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@...auckland.ac.nz>
To: "discussions@...sword-hashing.net" <discussions@...sword-hashing.net>
Subject: RE: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2)

I wrote:

>Maybe I should just tell everyone to use icc, which doesn't seem to have
>these problems (and generally produces better code than gcc to boot).  Or
>Visual Studio, for which I still need to check what it does when I get to a
>Windows box with it installed.

So without the check for > 0:

-- Snip --

[F:\Work]Test64.exe
-2147483556

[F:\Work]

-- Snip --

with the check for > 0:

-- Snip --

[F:\Work]Test64.exe

[F:\Work]

-- Snip --

That's built with /O2, maximise speed.

So while the Gnu folks are still accommodating one's-complement CDC 6600's
from 1965 (not sure if the 7600 was one's or two's-complement, but the later
Cybers and Cray-1 weren't any more), Microsoft have realised that INT_MAX +
100 = -ve on any known architecture.  It is somewhat disturbing to see that
LLVM is following the Gnu braindamage though...

Peter.