From owner-freebsd-security Tue Apr 21 08:32:31 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA25731 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 08:32:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gateman.zeus.leitch.com (gateman.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA25697 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 15:32:16 GMT (envelope-from woods@tap.zeus.leitch.com) Received: from zeus.leitch.com (tap.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.10]) by gateman.zeus.leitch.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/1.0) with ESMTP id LAA24057 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from brain.zeus.leitch.com (brain.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.32]) by zeus.leitch.com (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.0) with ESMTP id LAA02586 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from woods@localhost) by brain.zeus.leitch.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22702; Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from woods@tap.zeus.leitch.com) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199804211532.LAA22702@brain.zeus.leitch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: woods@zeus.leitch.com (Greg A. Woods) To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Using MD5 insted of DES for passwd ecnryption In-Reply-To: Mike Smith's message of "Tue, April 21, 1998 05:59:33 -0700" regarding "Re: Using MD5 insted of DES for passwd ecnryption " id <199804211259.FAA00330@antipodes.cdrom.com> References: <19980421124954.A1797@keltia.freenix.fr> <199804211259.FAA00330@antipodes.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.45 under Emacs 20.2.1 Reply-To: woods@zeus.leitch.com (Greg A. Woods) Organization: Planix, Inc.; Toronto, Ontario; Canada Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk [ On Tue, April 21, 1998 at 05:59:33 (-0700), Mike Smith wrote: ] > Subject: Re: Using MD5 insted of DES for passwd ecnryption > > As soon as you have more than one *different* binary running out of > /bin, you win of course, as there's only *one* copy (at most) of the > common shared libraries being backed by physical memory. That's not necessarily true, at least from what I've learned second hand. There can be a certain amount of overhead in terms of extra VM pages allocated for shared memory, so one additional shared binary may still not result in even reaching the same memory footprint as the same fully static binaries would. It would depend on the relative amounts of the shared libraries that each given binary might link in. In any case I'd be horrified to learn that whatever scheme of controlling password encryption is chosen relies on shared libraries. I think it should always be possible to statically link the whole system if one so desires. That's the one sure way to test if shared libraries are causing any weirdness. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP Planix, Inc. ; Secrets of the Weird To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message