Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 15:46:46 +0800
From: Bugtrace <bugtrace@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Speed of jtr on your machine?

Guys, I download john-1.7.8-jumbo-5-Linux-x86-64(Compiled by Jim
Fougeron) from http://openwall.info/wiki/_media/john/john-1.7.8-jumbo-5-Linux-x86-64.tar.gz?id=john%3Acustom-builds&cache=cache

Faster than mine.

pentest@...ntu:~/Downloads/john-1.7.8-jumbo-5-Linux-x86-64/run$ ./john
--format=raw-md5 --test
Benchmarking: Raw MD5 [gen]... Using raw-md5 mode, by linking to
md5_gen(0) functions DONE
Raw:	16789K c/s real, 16959K c/s virtual

pentest@...ntu:~/Downloads/john-1.7.8-jumbo-5-Linux-x86-64/run$ ./john
--format=phpass-md5 --test
Benchmarking: PHPass MD5 [phpass-md5]... Using phpass mode, by linking
to md5_gen(17) functions DONE
Raw:	13360 c/s real, 13360 c/s virtual


On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:52 AM, magnum <rawsmooth@...dband.net> wrote:
> On 2011-09-13 18:50, jfoug wrote:
>>>
>>> Then I should look at that.  It 'should' give some signature that lists
>>> it
>>> was built using sse2 intrinsic functions.
>>
>> Here is what I see in a 32 bit intrinsic build (cygwin). Now, this is not
>> jumbo-5, but I did not think anything changed about how md5_gen is built,
>> since then.
>>
>> $ ../run/john -test -form=md5-gen
>> Benchmarking:  md5_gen(0): md5($p)  (raw-md5)  [SSE2 16x4x2 (intr)]...
>> DONE
>> Raw:    9653K c/s
>>
>>
>> I will later check this on my pen drive linux-64 system, to see if there
>> are
>> problems showing up there, which do not appear on this 32 bit build.
>
>
> It shows correctly when using md5_gen(0) but not when using thin raw-md5:
>
> $ ./john -fo:"md5_gen(0)" -test
> Benchmarking:  md5_gen(0): md5($p)  (raw-md5)  [SSE2 16x4x2 (intr)]... DONE
> Raw:    13832K c/s real, 13832K c/s virtual
>
> $ ./john --format=raw-md5 --test
> Benchmarking: Raw MD5 [gen]... Using raw-md5 mode, by linking to md5_gen(0)
> functions DONE
> Raw:    13858K c/s real, 13858K c/s virtual
>
> This is simply because the format (rawMD5go_fmt_plug.c) says so:
> #define ALGORITHM_NAME                  "gen"
>
> It would be better if md5_gen replaced that. Perhaps it should when a thin
> format sets ALGORITHM_NAME to a null string?
>
>
> Back to topic, Bugtrace's performance figures are very low for some reason
> or the other. What's the output from -test -fo:"md5_gen(0)"?
>
> magnum
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.