Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 03:59:59 +0200
From: magnum <>
Subject: Re: PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256

On 22 Jul, 2013, at 21:53 , Dhiru Kholia <> wrote:
> On 07/22/13 at 08:36pm, Lukas Odzioba wrote:
>> 2013/7/16 Lukas Odzioba <>:
>>> Benchmarking: PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256, rounds=12000 [PBKDF2-SHA256]... (4xOMP) DONE
>>> Raw:    704 c/s real, 176 c/s virtual
>> Attached OpenCL version.
> Committed "pbkdf2-hmac-sha256-opencl.diff" to bleeding-jumbo.
> There is *no* need to use the "any_cracked" approach in this format. Let
> us try not to repeat my past "sins" ;)

Right. This is better, although it doesn't affect speed for a slow format like this:

static int cmp_all(void *binary, int count)
	int i;

	for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
		if (host_crack[i].hash[0] == ((uint32_t *) binary)[0])
			return 1;
	return 0;

The occasional false positives will be rejected by cmp_one(). This will happen once in about 70 days at this speed...


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.