[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D473AAD.3040001@witherden.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:41:49 +0000
From: Freddie Witherden <freddie@...herden.org>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: FreeBSD crypt() / MD5-crypt implementation question
On 31/01/11 22:04, Simon Marechal wrote:
> Le 31/01/2011 16:32, Freddie Witherden a écrit :
>> implementation is not ideal (I am reasonably confident that you can get
>> 20% out of it without too much work) it does perform better than the
>
> That would be quite a nice improvement. The MD5 body function is pretty
> tight (performs like barswf, and I know nothing that is faster), but the
> "dispatch" part is far from optimal. According to my last profiling it
> only accounted for 15% of the processing time. I'm not sure where the
> low hanging fruits are in this patch ...
Interesting, as I've found it to perform quite a bit worse than BarsWF.
In the MD5 code I've been poking about with (which is--essentially--the
same as that in JtR) around ~4% can be gained from 0 input optimisation
for inputs less than 224-bits. This is similar to what BarsWF does,
although far less aggressive, given that MD5 crypt strings tend to be
longer.
I've also had some luck changing the definitions of the F and G
functions from their xor forms to their andnot forms. (Although this is
quite likely to be dependant on the individual instruction latencies.)
While I have not really toyed with the dispatch function I gleefully
assumed after a cursory glance that with a bit of TLC a good few percent
could be squeezed out of it. Perhaps I was being a bit too optimistic.
Polemically yours, Freddie.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
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.
