Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 23:46:48 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: minor optimisation in raw-sha1-ng On 11 Dec, 2012, at 21:09 , Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...xchg8b.com> wrote: > Hey magnum, a colleague pointed out an obvious optimisation I was > missing. It's very minor but obviously correct, I sent you a pull > request. Thanks, I obviously committed it although the normal variation between benchmarks seem to outsize the boost ;-) Have you had any look at Atom's findings btw? https://hashcat.net/p12/ AFAICT it's only applicable for dumb BF *) and naturally only for raw SHA1. This make it a lot less interesting. Nevertheless he did a good job. I haven't been able to find any info on whether it's currently implemented in hashCat or not? *) OK, it could also be a mask mode modulating the first four characters, as long as we're talking W. And one could probably target any of W..W instead. 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.