[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <94E554B3-086D-4D97-9191-2F1B89684EB7@m.patpro.net>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:35:03 +0100
From: Patrick Proniewski <p+password@...atpro.net>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: to Single or not to Single
(followup)
On 03 févr. 2017, at 16:01, Patrick Proniewski wrote:
> $ time ./john --single=None --nolog --verbosity=1 pw-1M --pot=pw-1M.pot
> Using default input encoding: UTF-8
> Loaded 1000000 password hashes with 1000000 different salts (dynamic_25 [sha1($s.$p) 128/128 AVX 4x1])
> Press 'q' or Ctrl-C to abort, almost any other key for status
> 1000000g 0:00:00:06 DONE (2017-02-03 15:45) 166449g/s 166449p/s 166449c/s 166449C/s abtvb
> Session completed
>
> real 0m12.747s
> user 0m8.558s
> sys 0m1.874s
>
> not so far, then. That's strange :/
Ok, I was not too happy with the simulation file: each candidate matches its hash, that's too simple. My real data have something like 50 to 60% match, and remaining candidates will need transformations to crack their respective hash.
So I tweaked the pw-1M file by screwing up randoms candidates (~38.4% of total candidates count):
sed 's,\([iwnfjzahlc]\):,\1x:,' pw-1M >pw-1M-real
then benchmarking the resulting file:
$ time ./john --single=None --nolog --verbosity=1 pw-1M-real --pot=pw-1M-real.pot
Using default input encoding: UTF-8
Loaded 1000000 password hashes with 1000000 different salts (dynamic_25 [sha1($s.$p) 128/128 AVX 4x1])
Press 'q' or Ctrl-C to abort, almost any other key for status
0g 0:00:00:02 50.00% (ETA: 16:24:20) 0g/s 0p/s 0c/s 0C/s
30769g 0:00:00:08 50.00% (ETA: 16:24:33) 3445g/s 5563p/s 5563c/s 5563C/s aoygm
48159g 0:00:00:18 50.00% (ETA: 16:24:53) 2544g/s 4108p/s 4108c/s 4108C/s agmys
61712g 0:00:00:29 50.00% (ETA: 16:25:15) 2062g/s 3341p/s 3341c/s 3341C/s aprzjx
82423g 0:00:00:52 50.00% (ETA: 16:26:01) 1557g/s 2523p/s 2523c/s 2523C/s cxox
93556g 0:00:01:08 50.00% (ETA: 16:26:33) 1357g/s 2201p/s 2201c/s 2201C/s yvoq
105281g 0:00:01:29 50.00% (ETA: 16:27:15) 1170g/s 1897p/s 1897c/s 1897C/s pfkwx
117217g 0:00:01:54 50.00% (ETA: 16:28:04) 1028g/s 1665p/s 1665c/s 1665C/s vpqu
132177g 0:00:02:29 50.00% (ETA: 16:29:15) 881.5g/s 1428p/s 1428c/s 1428C/s acwzhx
145131g 0:00:03:06 50.00% (ETA: 16:30:29) 776.4g/s 1257p/s 1257c/s 1257C/s airzx
193370g 0:00:06:35 50.00% (ETA: 16:37:27) 488.4g/s 791.9p/s 791.9c/s 791.9C/s amoxr
...
So I guess non-good candidates have a huge performance hit somewhere :/
patpro
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.
