[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150629191739.GA30645@openwall.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:17:39 +0300
From: Aleksey Cherepanov <lyosha@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Using Probabilistic Context Free Grammars (Was
precomputed attacks)
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 03:04:48PM -0400, Alain Espinosa wrote:
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Matt Weir <cweir@...edu>
> Date:06/29/2015 1:17 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [john-dev] Using Probabilistic Context Free Grammars (Was precomputed attacks)
>
> >> I also find your performance comparison unfair given that you don't take into account implementation speed
>
> ...When talking about performance I think it comes down the the law of diminishing returns. There are a couple of costs associated with a password cracking session...
>
> You are right in your points. Nevertheless from a *cracking* paper I expect, or want to expect, to consider and mention:
>
> - the algorithm is CPU parallelizable?
> - the algorithm is GPU friendly?
> - a base execution time compared to brute force. No need to optimize it, only some baseline to compare.
Even not parallelizable algo would be great with high number of salts.
It is possible to do cracking in parallel when there are several
salts because salts on its own provide parallelism.
Thanks!
--
Regards,
Aleksey Cherepanov
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.
