Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 23:31:19 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: statistics -openssl vs john On 04/14/2012 09:29 PM, Deepika Dutta Mishra wrote: > Hi, I was doing speed test between openssl des and john des. I get > following statistics for openssl > > type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 > bytes > des cbc 100225.76k 89521.76k 89778.20k 95060.70k > 96158.84k > > and for john > > Benchmarking: Traditional DES [32/32 BS]... DONE > Many salts: 434566 c/s real, 997527 c/s virtual > Only one salt: 426208 c/s real, 568277 c/s virtual > > Benchmarking: LM DES [32/32 BS]... DONE > Raw: 9306K c/s real, 12086K c/s virtual > > Now considering openssl, it can process 100225.76 x 1000 = 100225760 > bytes/sec which should account to 100225760 /8 = 12528220 encryptions/sec > (since DES block size is 8 bytes) > > With john, considering LM DES (which according to what I read does 2 DES > encryption), the result is 9306 x 1000 = 9306000 x 2 = 18612000 > encryption/sec > > This provided 1.48 times speedup with john des (non sse or other > optimizations). Am I right in my calculation? Maybe, but you might be comparing apples to pears anyway. Just drop this idea of comparing OpenSSL bytes/s with JtR c/s and you will do yourself a favour. 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.