hashcat Forum

I have done some very amateurish testing of the default rules supplied with HashcatPlus and I think I have found errors within some of them.

This is in no way critical of the people who kindly donated them but I thought it would be a good idea if someone more knowledgeable than myself could double check my findings please ?

If there are indeed errors in these rules lists could they be either fixed or removed from the default hashcat directory please ?

Thank you.

d3ad0ne.rule

Skipping rule: 0 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 1 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 10 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 11 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 12 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 13 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 14 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 15 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 150 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 16 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 17 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 189 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 2 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 200 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 2401 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 243 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 256 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 285 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 3 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 4 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 5 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 52 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 553 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 6 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 60 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 6561 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 7 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 8 (syntax error)
Skipping rule: 9 (syntax error)


passwordspro.rule

Skipping rule: i11i31 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: i11i31i51 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: i11i31i51i71 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: i11i31i51i71i91 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ci11i31 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ci11i31i51 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ci11i31i51i71 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ci11i31i51i71i91 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ui11i31 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ui11i31i51 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ui11i31i51i71 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: ui11i31i51i71i91 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: u$* (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: u^* (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: cT1i1. (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: cT2i2. (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: cT3i3. (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: cT4i4. (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: cT5i5. (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: sa@so0se3 (duplicate rule)
Skipping rule: csa@so0se3 (duplicate rule)

T0XlC.rule

Skipping rule: ^o^o^z^ (syntax error)
Skipping rule: c^o^o^z^ (syntax error)
Skipping rule: l^o^o^z^ (syntax error)

perfect.rule

I have no idea why this is in the rule folder, it seems to just repeat the character “:”

passwordspro.rule is the original insidepro version. we cant change anything on it and perfect.rule is a benchmarking rule.

(11-15-2011, 03:44 PM)atom Wrote: [ -> ]passwordspro.rule is the original insidepro version. we cant change anything on it

I see, I assume that’s a copyright thingy ? Perhaps a note in the folder informing people about this and leave it to them to decide if to modify their local copy ?

So, can the d3ad0ne.rule and the T0XlC.rule be fixed without the need for copyright permission ?

Also can I make a suggestion that the “perfect.rule” is renamed to “benchmark”.rule” to avoid any confusion as I think some users may think it is a perfect set of rules rather than a benchmark test.

Thank you.

(11-15-2011, 05:03 PM)Hash-IT Wrote: [ -> ]Also can I make a suggestion that the “perfect.rule” is renamed to “benchmark”.rule” to avoid any confusion as I think some users may think it is a perfect set of rules rather than a benchmark test.

Thank you.

Very Good Suggestion

i have the permission for all of these rules from their original autors. the credits therefore are in docs/credits file.

I think you may have misunderstood me, I meant copyright issues are probably preventing you from modifying / fixing the rules mentioned not that you weren't crediting other people work.

Sorry if I wasn't clear about that, I know you have permission and display credits. I was just concerned that rules with known errors in them are being distributed with hashcat. Hashcat has a good reputation of quality and I was trying to help maintain that ! In a tiny way but hey its something ! LOL

I have actually fixed these rules for my own use, although it does seem a shame I can't share them. Any way round it ?