[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <442422F9.50800@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:48:57 +0000
From: Hari Sekhon <harisekhon@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: JTR not exactly breaking the speed limits
I'm running john on 2 linux machines to crack unshadowed passwords from
another linux box in the format FreeBSD MD5 [32/32] I think.
One is a pathetic 1GHz Via cpu with 256Mb ram; ./john --status is as
follows
./john --status
guesses: 1 time: 4:05:50:23 (3) c/s: 1591
The second box is a better AMD Athlon XP 2200+ with 1.25Gb Ram; it's
./john --status is as follows
./john --status
guesses: 2 time: 3:16:50:00 (3) c/s: 5147
What I want to know is why the c/s process is so slow. Is MD5 such a
slow algorithm to generate a hash with? I think so judging by how long
it takes me to generate .md5s for files at home....
When cracking cache dumped DES from XP machines I used to get something
like 300,000 tries a second, I think I'll be here forever on this
password file. Maybe the salts are making it harder... can't remember
how many salts this has though and I don't know how to find out.
I know this is the primary decision for choosing the hashing method for
the shadow file and most linux distros give you the choice between MD5
and blowfish. I was under the impression that blowfish was the stronger
since it's slower to generate and therefore stronger to brute force in
this manner? Are there any stronger?
Thanks
Hari
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.
