Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 11:04:13 +0100 From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Oracle11 vs. lotus85 On 01/02/2014 10:22 AM, Frank Dittrich wrote: > On 01/02/2014 05:47 AM, magnum wrote: >> On 2014-01-01 19:39, magnum wrote: >>> On 2013-12-31 02:32, Frank Dittrich wrote: >>>> I reported the error in August (without bisecting it at that time), but >>>> nobody cared: >>>> http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2013/08/01/8 >>>> http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-dev/2013/08/02/4 >>> >>> Was the SAP issue fixed since then? I now get 0 cracked for Oracle11 but >>> no problem with SAP. >> >> The Oracle11 problem was just because TS need to supply >> --format=oracle11 after lotus85 was added. Fixed in TS. > > Funny. > > (bleeding-jumbo)run $ ./john ../test/oracle11_tst.in --format=lotus85 |tail > Press 'q' or Ctrl-C to abort, almost any other key for status > 1500g 0:00:00:00 DONE (2014-01-02 10:17) 2205g/s 13239p/s 17647c/s > 17647C/s u1499-oracle111..u0-oracle11u0 > Use the "--show" option to display all of the cracked passwords reliably > Session completed > u1498-oracle11 (u9-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u8-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u7-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u6-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u5-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u4-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u3-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u2-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u1-oracle11) > u1498-oracle11 (u0-oracle11) > > Are oracle11 and lotus85 essentially the same formats? No, it's just that lotus85 is seriously broken (either the algorithm used by Lotus Notes 8.5, or just out implementation. I suggest setting FMT_NOT_EXACT and running incremental mode against lotus85 and oracle11 test hashes... Frank
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.