Hi Eric,

I think I wasted your time... The Checksum in the EXE header is 3
bytes (high order byte always appears to be 0x00). So Im wondering if
the algorithm is a truncated CRC32 (or variant), or a CRC-24 (or
variant).

> I looked at the code.  Gak.
LOL... I was hoping you could spot something in the table that set off a flag.

> Apropos your other message, this algorithm computes a 32-bit value.
Yes - I think I read elsewhere that this is ZModem and the like, but
not my Algorithm of interest... Sorry Again!

Jeff

On 6/21/07, Eric Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 07:58 PM 6/20/2007, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> >I was hoping you could shed some light on the particular CRC in use by
> >Win32 executables. I found the following reference, but my eye is not
> >trained to spot CRC32 flavors based on tables...
>
> I looked at the code.  Gak.
>
> Disclaimer 1: It's not clear on brief inspection that the computed value is
> actually a CRC.  It will only be a CRC if the precomputed table is
> correct.  That table is 64 rows of 4 entries of 32 bits each.  The quickest
> check, (a[0] == 0) and (a[1] xor a[2] == a[3]), passes.
>
> I now assume in the foregoing that it computes a CRC.  In hardware, CRC's
> are ordinarily computed a bit at a time, with a fixed time per bit
> (typically one clock cycle).  This algorithm is computing them at a rate of
> octet per iteration.  It would be possible to compute the polynomial from
> the table.  Because of linearity, only 7 values should be necessary
> (a[2^k], k \in 1..7).
>
> I could work out the modulus polynomial, but it would take me a few hours,
> I'm guessing.
>
> Apropos your other message, this algorithm computes a 32-bit value.
>
> Eric

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Crypto++ Users" 
Google Group.
To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at 
http://www.cryptopp.com.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to