Re: brute.lua, unpwdb.lua, custom iterators and flexibility

[David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 05:11:16PM +0200, Aleksandar Nikolic wrote:
> I say "could be" because the current code for account_iterator has
> this:
> if ( 'table' == type(users) and 'table' == type(pass) ) then
> ...
> elseif ( 'function' == type(users) and 'function' == type(pass) ) then
> ...
> end

This looks like it should be written more clearly anyway:

function table_iterator(t)
        return unpwdb.limited_iterator(unpwdb.closure(t))
end

if 'table' == type(users) then
        users = table_iterator(users)
end
if 'table' == type(pass) then
        pass = table_iterator(pass)
end
...

unpwdb.closure is local but it shouldn't be. It should also have a
better name like, say, table_iterator.

> This means that we can only specify an iterator with either both
> usernames and passwords as tables or functions
> and not , for example, table of usernames and iterator for passwords.
> This could easily be expanded for more flexibility by adding two more
> elseif blocks for remaining combinations.

Don't add two more cases; coerce everything to an iterator and then you
have just one case.

David Fifield
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/