Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 20:17:38 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: SSH thread-safety Dhiru - On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 08:46:38PM +0530, Dhiru Kholia wrote: > On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > > What if you add more test vectors - will the benchmark show poor speeds > > like above? > > I have added a self-test key with key length of 2048 bits (since the > man page says "For RSA keys, the minimum size is 768 bits and the > default is 2048 bits.") . Doing this has slowed down the benchmark > considerably. > > $ ../run/john -format=ssh -t > Benchmarking: ssh [32/64]... DONE > Raw: 19988 c/s real, 19988 c/s virtual Oh. So it's one 2048-bit and one 1024-bit key that are being used for the benchmark now, right? Perhaps this should be reflected in the comment. Right now, BENCHMARK_COMMENT is set to empty string, but perhaps it should be " one 2048-bit and one 1024-bit key". And while we're at it, perhaps FORMAT_NAME should be uppercase "SSH". Either of these changes will break relbench of this format against older versions, but that's as desired because we've changed what's being benchmarked. I've tried changing BENCHMARK_LENGTH from -1001 to -1000 or 0 to get separate benchmarks for many vs. one salt. Somehow the results are almost the same, even though with two test keys of different size I expected them to differ - aren't we using just one of the tests for the single-salt benchmark? Any explanation why I did not see a significant change in speed in this experiment? Also, any explanation why the benchmark speed is now very similar to actual cracking speed for 2048-bit keys rather than somewhere in the middle between that for 2048- and 1024-bit keys if both are seen in tests? Thanks, Alexander
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.