[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTim3kJRZ5S4-brRTuXtf71ESZgZVUg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:37:08 -0600
From: RB <aoz.syn@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Parallel cracking
On 2011-06-28, Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com> wrote:
> 0:08:00:00 - Switching to length 8
> 0:08:00:00 - Expanding tables for length 8 to character count 26
> 0:08:00:00 - Trying length 8, fixed @1, character count 26
>
> Have the next thread start at
>
> 0:12:00:00 - Switching to length 8
> 0:12:00:00 - Expanding tables for length 8 to character count 28
> 0:12:00:00 - Trying length 8, fixed @5, character count 28
> and so on...
That is precisely what the MPI patch does, or at least used to when I
last maintained it. The problem is that it doesn't scale very well.
What really should happen with distributed processing is breaking up
the actual cryptographic calculations (at whatever level makes sense),
this level is actually too non-granular, especially for large runs on
many processors.
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.
