[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKGDhHUZ7rov_hONosdHn=3p-BCx2bLkOmKixZMdVYqXyT0gnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 20:41:54 +0200
From: Agnieszka Bielec <bielecagnieszka8@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [GSoC] John the Ripper support for PHC finalists
2015-04-25 20:10 GMT+02:00 Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>:
> if we managed to move some of the
> processing (that is key specific but not salt specific) out of the
> actual hash function and into set_key(). If much processing could be
> moved like that, it'd indicate a weakness of the PHC finalist. None of
> them should have design errors allowing for that. So my question is:
> are the "many salts" vs. "only one salt" benchmark results significantly
> different for any cost settings on any devices currently (and can you
> please post specific numbers)? If so, this may need to be investigated.
on well with AVX2 I receive results:
a@...l:~/jtr2/run$ ./john --test --format=pomelo --cost=0:0,0:0
Will run 8 OpenMP threads
Benchmarking: POMELO, Generic pomelo [AVX2]... (8xOMP) DONE
Speed for cost 1 (N) of 0, cost 2 (r) of 0
Many salts: 1704K c/s real, 213274 c/s virtual
Only one salt: 1055K c/s real, 132053 c/s virtual
the difference is biggest for 0,0 costs also for 2,0 and 0,2 is a
difference of 24% and 17%
at this moment I don't know why this happens
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.
