[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55F7C8E4.5080108@mailbox.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:29:40 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank.dittrich@...lbox.org>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Judy array
On 09/15/2015 03:03 AM, Solar Designer wrote:
> magnum - testing this stuff, I see that pot sync is a major bottleneck.
> Since this is your feature, you might want to benchmark and optimize it
> some more, or/and maybe we just want it disabled by default when cracking
> saltless hashes.
Even with fast salted hashes, it is a problem when you have may be 4
instances of john running, each with about 2 million hashes, and
cracking many passwords.
Here, pot sync didn't make any sense, because each process was attacking
separate hashes. But even IF id would make sense (say, attacking the
same set of hashes with different word lists/rules), the slow down due
to pot sync was much worse than any possible gain.
So I adjusted the config and set
ReloadAtCrack = N
ReloadAtSave = N
You might also want to set
ReloadAtDone = Y
(It didn't matter for me, because I didn't use --fork.)
Frank
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.
