|
Search Results
|
| Post |
Author
[desc]
|
Forum |
Replies |
Views |
Posted |
| |
|
Thread: maskprocessor increment with 2 digits applied
Post: RE: maskprocessor increment with 2 digits applied
|
Code:
--
-plus hccap ?l?d?d
-plus hccap ?l?l?d?d
-plus hccap ?l?l?l?d?d
-plus hccap ?l?l?l?l?d?d
-plus hccap ?l?l?l?l?l?d?d
...
--
Run one at a time.
Another option is to make a loop:
Code:... |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
11 |
22,058 |
12-20-2012, 11:16 PM |
| |
|
Thread: maskprocessor increment with 2 digits applied
Post: RE: maskprocessor increment with 2 digits applied
| I don't about WPA, but for simple hashing algorithms, see: https://www.md5decrypter.co.uk/hash-a-password.aspx |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
11 |
22,058 |
12-20-2012, 11:42 PM |
| |
|
Thread: How to configure mask attack
Post: RE: How to configure mask attack
| hccap files can only contain one handshake. It's impossible to crack more than one handshake using -plus, unless you run more than one instance (with different hccap files).
I don't know how to tell ... |
|
M@LIK |
General Help
|
5 |
16,695 |
12-21-2012, 01:01 AM |
| |
|
Thread: Exhausted?
Post: RE: Exhausted?
|
Toil Wrote:
--
am i doing it wrong
--
Yes, you're doing it wrong.
1st, your commands are ugly, stack them properly.
2nd, your use of the -c parameter with a brute-force attack is extremely ignora... |
|
M@LIK |
General Help
|
6 |
40,300 |
12-24-2012, 04:01 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Hashcat Bruteforce attack
Post: RE: Hashcat Bruteforce attack
| The following thread will help you:
https://hashcat.net/forum/thread-1836.html |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
8 |
48,691 |
12-30-2012, 02:37 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42b5: The rule Q
Post: 0.42b5: The rule Q
| The new rule Q seems to do exactly the opposite of what it really suppose to do.
D contains "pussy".
R1 contains "M u Q".
R2 contains "M l Q".
"hc64 -r R1 D --stdout" prints nothing.
While "h... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
2 |
3,299 |
12-31-2012, 01:39 AM |
| |
|
Thread: oclHashcat-plus v0.10 and oclHashcat-lite v0.11
Post: RE: oclHashcat-plus v0.10 and oclHashcat-lite v0.1...
| Great job atom (https://hashcat.net/forum/user-1.html), as always, lovely updates.
Happy new version everyone! |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Announcements
|
36 |
85,156 |
12-31-2012, 05:44 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 2013 outdated versions
Post: RE: 2013 outdated versions
| The dude made his post before the release, so stop being smart-ass(s). |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
7 |
6,486 |
01-01-2013, 03:10 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42b5: The rule Q
Post: RE: 0.42b5: The rule Q
| Fixed with hashcat-0.42. Thank you! |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
2 |
3,299 |
01-01-2013, 03:12 PM |
| |
|
Thread: hashcat v0.42
Post: RE: hashcat v0.42
| Another step forward, keep up the good work! |
|
M@LIK |
Old hashcat Announcements
|
3 |
17,433 |
01-01-2013, 03:13 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 2013 outdated versions
Post: RE: 2013 outdated versions
| You now force me to use my psychic abilities and rephrase what the dude meant when he made his post.
Obviously the post is about CPU's hashcat, 0.42b5 preciously. His reference of -plus's beta was ... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
7 |
6,486 |
01-01-2013, 03:37 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42: Bugs
Post: 0.42: Bugs
| In this thread I'm going to share bugs that still exist in the current latest release of CPU's hashcat (0.42), their severity level and personal workaround if available. Feel free to join me pissing a... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
11 |
11,655 |
01-01-2013, 04:31 PM |
| |
|
Thread: SL3, they did it again
Post: RE: SL3, they did it again
| Moneyworshipper sons of whores...
It's like they would kill each other for this sl3 dogshit... |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-lite Support
|
71 |
191,553 |
01-01-2013, 06:40 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42: Bugs
Post: RE: 0.42: Bugs
| Well, let's just consider the "keep things a little private" part.
I assume you're talking about the --hex-salt bug.
Details:
Code:
--
H:
38b3eff8baf56627478ec76a704e9b52:3130
// "101" md5ed
... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
11 |
11,655 |
01-01-2013, 06:54 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42: Bugs
Post: RE: 0.42: Bugs
| Level: Non-critical.
hashcat adds something completely different than the actual hash to hashcat.pot.
Further details: https://hashcat.net/forum/thread-1789.html
Workaround: If you need them so bad... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
11 |
11,655 |
01-01-2013, 07:39 PM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42: Bugs
Post: RE: 0.42: Bugs
|
atom Wrote:
--
Hm, thought I fixed this. So its still in there?
--
Yes, sir.
Level: Non-critical.
hashcat doesn't remove the hash using --remove parameter if it was only one hash and it was crack... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
11 |
11,655 |
01-02-2013, 11:09 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Appending Last Char Mask
Post: RE: Appending Last Char Mask
| Depending on your shell interpretations.
Mostly, The first option should work fine. |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-lite Support
|
5 |
10,070 |
01-02-2013, 11:23 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Bugs at new version
Post: RE: Bugs at new version
| Yes, seen before.
As far as I can tell, this happens because of the dict caching thing. Try removing hashcat.dictstat and try again.
Btw, it's no big deal the attack will exhaust when its finished. |
|
M@LIK |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
4 |
8,506 |
01-03-2013, 12:32 AM |
| |
|
Thread: 0.42: Bugs
Post: RE: 0.42: Bugs
|
radix Wrote:
--
k, hex charset is fixed
--
hashcat-0.43b1:
Okay, it's a "known option" now, but:
Code:
--
hc64 -a3 --hex-charset -1 30 hash ?1
...
NOTE: press enter for status-screen
cfcfcc... |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
11 |
11,655 |
01-05-2013, 10:47 PM |
| |
|
Thread: oclHashcat-plus-0.10-rc3-12.8
Post: RE: oclHashcat-plus-0.10-rc3-12.8
|
atom Wrote:
--
The lots-of-wordlists bug is fixed in b2
--
Confirmed. Thanks! |
|
M@LIK |
Beta Tester
|
12 |
11,855 |
01-05-2013, 11:02 PM |
