[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fa4f321cb6c1341025697d5732306ca0@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 14:12:34 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: ssha cpu format
On 21 Apr, 2013, at 13:37 , magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 Apr, 2013, at 1:56 , Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com> wrote:
>> None of these load for me (even if drop the {xxx} )
>> username:{SSHA}WTT3B9Jjr8gOt0Q7WMs9/XvukyhTQj0Ns0jMKQ==
>> username:{SHA}cMiB1KJphN3OeV9vcYF8nPRIDnk=:::::::
>> datkommadr:{SSHA}f4VgVNep4cz7Vy1BgPbmelC/N6+rYdWw7WGuLA==
>> dabob:{SSHA}sa0QU3f7p7CPpMSA3st/N9Hjjlq1in7MiIbAWw==
>> bob:{SSHA}Yio7m8PrVuK4apWV4l0TqCjbeHlvLVN6
>> data:{SHA}S0QPkjhGaP3VAe6oPukLMTh3zMmqIOJ1LlU9g==:::data
>> -rich
>
> That's strange. Here, the four {SSHA} hashes loads and cracks by the salted-sha1 format. One of the {SHA} hashes (the first) loads and cracks by the nsldap format, the other one is rejected. I'll look into why.
The last one is too long and it's not even correct Base64 (incorrect padding, I think). It does not seem to be a valid hash.
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.
