[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJpaVcRfmwLZ=wbMQYbYUMdNfkYNaUADCAh3EJmQ6uB33W_NVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:55:12 -0500
From: Brian Wallace <nightstrike9809@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Proposed optimizations to pwsafe
Fixed the OpenSSL comment issue and made a pull request. I can look into
doing the SIMD for SHA256.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:14:55PM -0500, Brian Wallace wrote:
> > I got some time before I thought I would have any, and dug around the
> > source to get an idea of how data flows in JtR. I've done a preliminary
> > implementation of the optimization in my forked repository, with some
> gains.
>
> Thank you!
>
> > Old:
> > ./john --test=15 --format=pwsafe
> > Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [32/64]... (6xOMP) DONE
> > Raw: 7027 c/s real, 1213 c/s virtual
> >
> > New:
> > ./john --test=15 --format=pwsafe
> > Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [32/64 OpenSSL]... (6xOMP) DONE
> > Raw: 8268 c/s real, 1395 c/s virtual
>
> I've just tested on FX-8120, and I am seeing a similar difference:
>
> Old:
> Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [32/64 OpenSSL]... (8xOMP) DONE
> Raw: 6857 c/s real, 854 c/s virtual
>
> New:
> Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [32/64 OpenSSL]... (8xOMP) DONE
> Raw: 8309 c/s real, 1041 c/s virtual
>
> BTW, the " OpenSSL" comment is now wrong and should be removed.
>
> Meanwhile, here's a tweet by atom:
>
> <hashcat> Added kernel for cracking "Passwords Safe" container to hashcat
> and oclHashcat! Its faster than one would expect: hd7970: 501k, FX8120: 24k
>
> 24k is great, but not surprising - it only means that atom actually has
> SIMD code for SHA-256, unlike us. We need to implement it. At this
> time, we have SIMD code for MD4, MD5, SHA-1, but not yet for SHA-256 and
> SHA-512. We have an unclaimed task here:
>
> http://openwall.info/wiki/ideas#Tasks1
>
> (OK, the description is out of date, now that hashcat clearly has SIMD
> implementation of at least SHA-256, and perhaps also SHA-512.)
>
> As to HD 7970, here's our current speed:
>
> $ ./john -te -fo=pwsafe-opencl -pla=1
> OpenCL platform 1: AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing, 2 device(s).
> Device 0: Tahiti (AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series)
> Local worksize (LWS) 64, Global worksize (GWS) 57344
> Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [OpenCL]... DONE
> Raw: 353975 c/s real, 17203K c/s virtual
>
> hashcat's is better, too (354k vs. 501k). Lukas?
>
> Alexander
>
Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.
