[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANO7a6yXvCHa9wCQH+hsxoPy10D3ZvaypdqXjiCwtF_+fe7BRA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:37:06 +0530
From: Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Add support for cracking M$ Outlook's PST files
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:31 PM, jfoug <jfoug@....net> wrote:
> Here is a faster version. It uses the pkzip.h crc table, But still 'can' use
> the pst-crc.h file also (just slower).
>
> I changed the OMP scale, and scale of non OMP builds (Dhiru, for fast
> hashes, you really need to change these, and stop using existing code you
> did for slow formats).
I still have to play around and understand these parameters. Thanks!
> For this code, there is a #define within crypt_all. If that is set to 1,
> your header file code is used. If set to 0 (where it is set now), the pkzip
> code is used.
>
> The only difference from 'normal' CRC32 (like in pkzip) and this PST crc, is
> in the initialization, and lack of complement on ending. But the crc poly
> is the same, and this is trivial to setup to use the existing tables. The
> code was 'falsely' thinking that doing these CRC's 4 bytes at a time was
> faster. It may be faster on longer strings, but on shorter stuff (like JTR
> password cracking), the initial and post for loops slow things down beyond
> the gains seen.
I see that you have replaced ComputeCRC with pkzip_crc32. Did you
modify pkzip_crc32 code or did it work as it is?
Should this format be separate or can it be done in another format?
--
Cheers,
Dhiru
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
