From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1646
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: Help-wanted tasks for musl
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:29:21 +0200
Message-ID: <20120819172921.GF16602@port70.net>
References: <20120819042611.GA8731@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20120819114914.GD16602@port70.net>
 <20120819165652.GE16602@port70.net>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1345397377 20729 80.91.229.3 (19 Aug 2012 17:29:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:29:37 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-1647-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Aug 19 19:29:38 2012
Return-path: <musl-return-1647-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-1647-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1T39Jf-0000GL-8G
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 19:29:35 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 29729 invoked by uid 550); 19 Aug 2012 17:29:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 29721 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2012 17:29:33 -0000
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120819165652.GE16602@port70.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1646
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1646>

* Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net> [2012-08-19 18:56:52 +0200]:
> 3)* reference implementation and glibc accepts negative
> rounds in an implementation defined way, ie.
> 
>   '$5$rounds=-4294965296$' is treated as
>   '$5$rounds=2000$' on a 32bit system and as
>   '$5$rounds=999999999$' on a 64bit one
> 
> (according to spec N is clamped into 1000...999999999
> so the correct treatment would be '$5$rounds=1000$')
> 

i was wrong here about the correct treatment

the spec says that N is an unsigned decimal so negative
numbers must not be recognized at all
(so in this case the default rounds should be used and
'rounds=-4294965296' should be treated as salt)

but i guess the spec does not matter much in this case,
either we should be bug compatible with glibc or reject
such salts