Search Results
|
Post |
Author |
Forum |
Replies
[asc]
|
Views |
Posted |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: Bruteforce + rules
Consider the following scenario: you have to crack a md5 hash which belong to a password which has a lenght of 16 characters with the following format:
$password = $word . $word;
# password is the du... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-22-2017, 03:22 AM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
phahRoe1, thanks for your answer, but...
I know how to use mask attacks, bruteforce attacks, dictionary attack, and rules. And I have read these links too.
In fact, it works. But it is very very... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-22-2017, 04:35 AM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
What is the point to generate 857,375 rules when I'm only interested in one of them: duplicate (concatenate with itself) the random word?
Well, you'll get more speed but it'll be based on processin... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-22-2017, 05:02 AM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
royce, thanks. I'll try something like that.
Anyway, it would be so easier if there was possible to use rules with brute force attacks. So, what is the reason for not allowing that? |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-22-2017, 02:42 PM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
royce, I'm guessing too but from my point of view there shouldn't be any big differences between taking words from a dictionary/file or generating them internally and then apply the rules to them. So ... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-22-2017, 08:10 PM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
I think so because if you make a proof using a dictionary file you get a speed similar to that hybrid attack. So it could be another interesting reason to consider allowing the use of rules directly i... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-24-2017, 09:56 PM |
|
|
Thread: Bruteforce + rules
Post: RE: Bruteforce + rules
Thank to both very much indeed. I have just tried it and works better than simply generate all of them with maskprocessor (in addition I was trying it on a notebook without a GPU, so the improving is ... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
14 |
14,519 |
11-23-2017, 03:45 AM |
|
|
Thread: hashcat 4.0.1 more slow than 3.6 (GT 740M)
Post: RE: hashcat 4.0.1 more slow than 3.6 (GT 740M)
atom, you should use the same parameter in both cases in order to compare the results...
If you use -w4 with one of them and -w3 with the other one, you are rigging the results, aren't you?
Co... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
7 |
6,852 |
11-22-2017, 02:38 PM |
|
|
Thread: hashcat 4.0.1 more slow than 3.6 (GT 740M)
Post: RE: hashcat 4.0.1 more slow than 3.6 (GT 740M)
royce, I think I have been polite, haven't I? And I haven't said any lie, have I? So I don't understand your words against me (I would like to ask you if you can avoid things like that in the future, ... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
7 |
6,852 |
11-22-2017, 10:01 PM |
|
|
Thread: LUKS benchmarks and estimated times
Post: RE: LUKS benchmarks and estimated times
It will take many thousands of years.
According to the speed indicated by royce, using one of the most powerful graphics cards of the moment:
* if it was only digits, it'd take: 10¹⁰/(10KH/s * 60... |
|
asirena |
hashcat
|
2 |
3,481 |
11-27-2017, 02:53 PM |