Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:57:44 -0500 From: Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Fork=n On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:16:47PM -0400, Rich Rumble wrote: >> Actually I didn't even notice until you did: (contest thread) >> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: >> With --fork, it turns out that john.pot is not updated on its own, at >> least not by child processes. You have to "killall -1 john" to get it >> updated, or interrupt john (but then you can't easily restore). I am >> using the "killall -1 john" approach before I take john.pot's for >> uploads to the contest server now. > > Oh, you're correct, and I did not recall correctly. Sorry to bring this thread back up again, something I noticed using the -fork code from the contest is that each fork acted as it's own single john instance (seems obvious) and thus the password hashes are loaded for each, not shared like in OMP. I only *really* noticed because I had a large DES file I was playing with and noticed how large my memory consumption got. Again I'm not sure if this code is going to make it back into JtR in a meaningful way, but if it did "sharing" the hash file might be a good thing. OMP and or MPI may do what -fork/node was doing in a better way. I'm just toying around right now with this contest build vs a recent OMP build for giggles. -rich
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.