Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:21:27 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: key-length for mask mode. Hi Sayantan, On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:40:41AM +0530, Sayantan Datta wrote: > I have introduced a few changes to raw-md5-kernel. Now we can achieve > nearly 2700Mc/s with around 12k loaded hashes. That's good news, but have you reviewed myrice's PG-test and experimented with it by now (with a variety of loaded hash counts ranging from one to millions)? If not yet, please stop all other work and do that now! It is wrong to abandon previous attempts without even using the opportunity to learn from them (both what was done right and what was done wrong). And yes, myrice's code achieved a similar speed, including with more hashes - IIRC, we were testing with 1M and 10M, as well as with a few thousand, and the speed somehow varied between invocations, sometimes being above 3000M c/s and sometimes below. (This is twice slower than hashcat's, though.) > More optimizations are possible if we could limit the key length to 16. > Current key length limit of 55 seems to be unnecessary. This should free up > some more registers and allow me to introduce few more bitmpas. No, we should be supporting long passwords. 55 is essential (max for one MD5 block), anything less is artificial (speaking of raw MD5 only). Actually, I think hashcat went in the opposite direction - getting rid of those length limits - after CMIYC 2012, where the average password length was 27 (I think the contest organizers said so). I think there's no good excuse for us to sacrifice support for longer passwords while still achieving only at most one half of the potential speed. (I say "at most" because hashcat's speed, while very good, is most likely not the absolute maximum speed one can achieve.) 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.