[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a52c962b-deeb-5d82-2e74-6eb39bb5e050@openwall.net>
Date: Sun, 8 May 2016 08:42:16 -0500
From: jfoug <jfoug@...nwall.net>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Status of session when using -pipe and -stdin
On 5/7/2016 8:30 PM, Matt Weir wrote:
> A simple workaround on my part would be
> to pass the john cracking session name in to the script as an argument and
> then have it call ./john -status directly.
>
> Thanks again,
> Matt
That actually sounds like about the easiest workaround for the problem.
That way, again,
the script is in charge, but now it has the information required to poke
the child john
process to make it list what is happening.
I think you are right, that the ROI is not great, not too many people
will use this type of
logic. HOWEVER, having an acceptable procedure to make it work would be
helpful
Even within the script, you would not 'have' to pass over the session
name to the
instance of john being run, BUT simply be provided with the session name.
So something like:
./databuild.pl run3 | ./john -pipe -rules=whatever input.txt -ses=run3
Now, databuild.pl would be able to contact the running session of john,
using
the session name, and trigger a status output from the process.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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.
