|
Message-ID: <20120605165830.GB19221@openwall.com> Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 20:58:30 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: incremental question On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 09:21:19AM +0200, pierzi wrote: > 0:02:48:42 - Expanding tables for length 8 to character count 22 [...] > So as far as I understand this means that incremental mode doesn't use > entire character count for desired mode at start (36 for alnum in my case), > it' simply expanding it one by one? Yes, kind of. The number reported refers to different character indices, though, which is not exactly the same as different characters. This is difficult to grasp, but luckily you probably don't need to. > Now i know that this is method is probably based on some statistics and > it's probably good for non-random generated passwords. But using it with > random-generated passwords like: > 9amxpgdr > e9naioai > fn0sceur > j0nkae0n > kuuhr9fw > m0d9npwc > qwrn9ssm > tbpo9gtx > vnnxjnen > xaf0fkpj These passwords might not be as random as they look. You could want to generate a custom .chr file from them and see if this speeds up further cracking - it might. > john needs expand character count to 36 to crack all of them Most likely, yes. > (or course if a=1 and 0=36) It's a lot trickier than that. > ...Now wouldn't be faster to start incremental mode with > char. count=36 at start? Theoretically, yes, but that overhead is negligible. > Is it even possible to do it? With incremental mode, no. What you're looking for is a dumb exhaustive search mode. You could try the external DumbForce mode, but I recommend that you simply continue with incremental. You really shouldn't care about saving a few seconds in a John run that will take days. Other things will have far greater effect on success rate and total run time. Alexander
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.