|
Message-ID: <CAFMma9MmXrPrC+LVnBEvcWwUa=Qz6fy3LjjfgXoQCXvxe9TxWg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:56:29 -0600 From: Richard Miles <richard.k.miles@...glemail.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: How does incremental mode works? Hi Magnum, Thanks for your reply, very appreciated. On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 2:09 PM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: > On 19 Nov, 2012, at 16:39 , Richard Miles <richard.k.miles@...glemail.com> > wrote: > > B.1) Once a new password is cracked with Markov should not be useful to > get this information to update the stats file and recalculate the > probabilistic? It may be wrong, but I guess that for example with a good > amount of passwords cracked with Markov if we used this data to modify the > stats "on the fly" it could give better results, not? > > You will never have a perfect stats file. Given that, your suggestion will > amplify the errors instead of making things better: Let's say your stats > file have too much weight for the letter 's' so you crack a lot of password > containing 's'. While this is a good thing, the downside is you missed (for > the sake of example) nearly all passwords containing a 'q'. Now, if you use > these results to modify your stats file, you get even more weight to 's' > and even less weight to 'q'. > Humm.. this makes sense. This idea of weight for chars looks similar to me to word frequency. Isn't it the principle for incremental mode? > > This is why the RockYou list is so much better than any list of cracked > passwords. Because the passwords were stored in the clear, the RockYou list > is a complete list of passwords from a large user base, not just the ones > that were cracked using some sort of method that will (always) have more or > less of errors like the (extreme) example I gave above. > Cool, this makes a lot of sense. But on the other hand since there was no password policy enforcement this may not be good for such situations. At least it's what I learned until the moment :) > > > D.1) This one is for Magnum again since he always improve jTr with > amazing small features that make our files easier. Today calculate the time > that Markov will run based on time is a bit of pain as described here > http://openwall.info/wiki/john/markov > > > > Do you think that you could add a new command-line option to automate > it? For example, maybe we could do something like > --markov=autoadjust-10800:0:0:13 whre jTr would calculate itself the best > possibility of markov level based on the current password cracking speed of > the target hash and autoadjust it to run during 3 hours (10800). What do > you think? > > That would be nice, but I currently don't have time and inspiration to do > anything like that. Doing it inside JtR itself might be a lot more tricky > than it might seem. It's probably a lot easier to make a trivial script > that accomplishes what you want. > Sorry, I was not aware it was tricky. I will try to do an script or something like that. Also, if someone have any similar script working and want to share I will be tankful. Thanks. Best regards. > > magnum
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.