hashcat Forum

I am practicing with rules again !!! Ha ah !

I love the substation rule where a user can replace an a with 4 for example (to make leet words).

However I ran into a problem. I would like to be able to make more than one character change at a single time. For example.

Password

I would like to be able to make ..

P4$$word
P4$$w0rd

…etc

I know I can stack up rules with the multi rule option so rule file 1 handles the a=4 and rule file 2 handles the s=$ parts but that leads to untidy rule lists and limits the users ability to add other rules such as upper lower case.

I tried making a rule like this…

sa4sa@sa^sb6sb8sc(sd)se3sh#

then like this…

sa4,sa@,sa^,sb6,sb8,sc(,sd),se3,sh#

Obviously neither worked. Is there a way you could make it possible for a user to make a line like the ones above in a rule file so they can have one rule file handle all substitution rules and free up the other rule files for other things ?

I think the table lookup used to be able to do this, but it is not available for plus.

Thank you.

You should use table-lookup attack for this task -a 5

Thanks atom, I hadn't realised you have added that attack mode to the new oclHashcat-plus.

I feel a little foolish mentioning this in my original post !

Quote:I think the table lookup used to be able to do this, but it is not available for plus.

In my defense though I have not been able to use the new version of oclHashcat-plus yet as I need a win 7 machine first.

The wiki may need updating if the new version has it.

Quote:* Attack modes:

0 = Straight
1 = Combination
3 = Brute-force
4 = Permutation
6 = Hybrid dict + mask
7 = Hybrid mask + dict

I havent ported it to oclHashcat-plus...

Oh I see, I have to pipe it to plus !

Thanks

Good thinking That should work, yes

On this wiki page it says ...

Quote:This attack is planned for migration into oclHashcat-plus in a later version (low priority).

I appreciate it says (low priority), but this is such a good feature I wonder if it could be included in v0.9 ?

Thank you.

I still have no idea how I could port it. Its incompatible to VLIW datatypes.

(06-02-2012, 10:03 PM)atom Wrote: [ -> ]I still have no idea how I could port it. Its incompatible to VLIW datatypes.

Oh dear, that's a real shame. Your table look-up attack is brilliant. I can carry on piping but it doesn't feel right as I don't seem to get full speed even though it claims to be.

I think I posted about it this last week. Sorry my memory fails me at the moment (not joking either !).

Edit ...
Here's the link.