Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 19:20:58 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: descrypt-opencl "section 0" fix On 2013-10-29 18:16, magnum wrote: > On 2013-10-29 15:23, Solar Designer wrote: >> descrypt-opencl was failing to crack some of the hashes the correct >> candidate passwords for which appeared in indices 0 to 31. > >> The attached patch attempts to and appears to correct this. At least my >> tests pass now. Note that while I am patching both instances of the >> code, I think I have tested only one of them. > > Committed. I'll investigate if we can enhance the Test Suite in some way. OK, without that patch: $ echo VTb0BiUKhqhjU >test $ echo 123456 >dict $ ../run/john -form:descrypt-opencl test -wo:dict Device 1: GeForce GT 650M Local worksize (LWS) 64, Global worksize (GWS) 16384 Loaded 1 password hash (descrypt-opencl, traditional crypt(3) [DES OpenCL]) Press 'q' or Ctrl-C to abort, almost any other key for status 0g 0:00:00:00 DONE (2013-10-29 19:09) 0g/s 100.0p/s 100.0c/s 100.0C/s 123456 Session completed I do not get the difference between the above vs. having a built-in test vector using the same data? In both cases, we call set_salt("VT"), set_key(0) and finally crypt_all(1). 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.