Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 23:34:44 +0300 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: faster hash file loading On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 07:35:38PM +0000, helleye wrote: > with this change managed to load 95mb file in 17 seconds This sounds about right, but it should not require the change. > instead of in 10min + (was lazy to let it finished loading) That's really weird. Must be a hash type supported with a crappy patch that doesn't bother to supply working binary_hash() functions. If so, the patch should be fixed because this also affects cracking speed. Oh, here's another thought: all of my load time benchmarks were for Unix crypt(3) hashes, which are salted - so a separate hash table was used for each salt. If your hashes were saltless, then all of them were sharing one 4096-entry hash table. 95 MB could mean around 1 million of hashes, so that loop you've removed could actually be doing around 250 iterations on average, which is quite a lot. Maybe JtR should support even larger hash tables for saltless hashes. Alexander -- To unsubscribe, e-mail john-users-unsubscribe@...ts.openwall.com and reply to the automated confirmation request that will be sent to you.
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.