[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFi77z2iM=+Gn0CK9L_8g9SDRFHxhqay0q3cdXnruJfL1b9mBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:08:42 +0100
From: vadim vitaly <vadim.vitaly@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Rulesets combination and logs
Thanks magnum, next time i'll take a look at the wishlist before asking ;-)
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 9:37 PM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 Dec, 2012, at 17:14 , vadim vitaly <vadim.vitaly@...il.com> wrote:
> > Here are two features requests for john. By feature request, i mean ideas
> > for those who have the time, will and skills to dev something new for
> john
> > (thanks to them).
> >
> > First, it would be great to have the possibility to combine various
> > rulesets when starting a cracking job.
> > I mean something like that:
> > ./john hashfile -rules:best.rules -rules:leetspeak.rules -w:wordlist
> > This way it would be easier to crack password which are the result of two
> > rules (or more!), for example: n1nt3nd0!2012 (leetspeak + append
> > special4num) and keeping at the same time a clear and simple rulesets in
> my
> > john.conf.
>
> This has been discussed and is already on various wish-lists, including
> the one I use for not forgetting about things:
> http://openwall.info/wiki/john/wishlist
>
>
> > The other feature request is the possibility to have more verbose log.
> > Particularly, when cracking a password using wordlist and rules. It would
> > be great to have information like the original word used and the rule
> > applied.
> > The idea here is to make better stats about which combinations of word
> and
> > rules are the more efficient (and the same way which rules are absolutely
> > not efficient).
> > I know it is already possible to have the rule used to cracked a password
> > in the john.log file, would it be possible to also add the original
> > candidate word ?
> > Something like that would be perfect for parsing:
> > 15 0:01:17:13 + Cracked bobama_history0 (password / originalword / rule)
>
> That would be nice, yes. But it's not very easy to accomplish - at the
> time we get a successful guess we no longer "know" what rule or word
> created a certain candidate (due to buffers and stuff). We could add code
> for it, but it would hit performance.
>
> You can use --mkpc=1 for getting a 1:1 between rules and guesses in the
> log, but that too hits performance (sometimes a lot).
>
> 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.
