[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 20:36:18 +0200
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: apingis@...nwall.net
Subject: Re: DES-based crypt(3) cracking on ZTEX 1.15y FPGA boards (descrypt-ztex)
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 07:22:33PM +0200, Solar Designer wrote:
> An easier (and better?) workaround is to buffer even more candidate
> passwords within 1 process. On my Qubes system, adding this line:
>
> +++ b/src/ztex/device_format.c
> @@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ void device_format_reset()
> // Mask data is ready, calculate and set keys_per_crypt
> unsigned int keys_per_crypt = jtr_bitstream->candidates_per_crypt
> / mask_num_cand();
> + keys_per_crypt *= 4;
> if (!keys_per_crypt)
> keys_per_crypt = 1;
>
> makes the standard clocks c/s rate increase from 806M to 828M, which
> suspiciously matches the theoretical maximum Denis gives for the current
> design in the just committed src/ztex/fpga-descrypt/README.md:
>
> https://github.com/magnumripper/JohnTheRipper/pull/2598/commits/1214de42284c8b66728f0f8fd362a743f54c2ab0#diff-c70cc4e9666091acde7a844bfc24d88d
>
> This appears to work. The cracked passwords stream isn't expected to be
> exactly the same (that is, not in the same order) because the larger
> buffers unfortunately result in less optimal ordering of the candidates
> with incremental mode and the like.
>
> Also, the total running time of some short sessions (in my testing:
> mask, but not wordlist) appears to increase - perhaps the very last
> crypt_all() call (for each salt) hashes many more keys than are actually
> supplied? Denis, perhaps this is something you could fix?
>
> Royce, unless Denis says this hack is somehow very wrong, feel free to
> try it on your cluster, and maybe you'll regain some of those lost ~15%.
>
> Please note that this code is also used for bcrypt (and the change gives
> me slight speedup for bcrypt, too - about 2%, which were presumably lost
> to USB pass-through - just not that much of a speedup, because the
> performance hit on it wasn't that bad in the first place).
>
> So if you do go for this, please test bcrypt both ways (without and with
> this change) as well. Perhaps keep two john binaries.
>
> keys_per_crypt factors other than 4 (such as 2, 3, 5, more) on this line
> may also be tried. I only tried 4 - I didn't tune. Denis, maybe make
> this configurable?
Testing this with the multiplier set to 8, I get the speeds to stabilize
at the unrealistic(?) for standard clocks figure of 831M. Could be
misreporting, but the actual results look OK.
$ ./john -form=descrypt-ztex -inc=lower -min-len=8 -max-len=8 -mask='?w?l?l?l?l' pw-fake-unix
ZTEX XXXXXXXXXX bus:2 dev:7 Frequency:220,160 220,160 220,160 220,160
Using default input encoding: UTF-8
Loaded 3269 password hashes with 2243 different salts (descrypt-ztex, traditional crypt(3) [DES ZTEX])
Press 'q' or Ctrl-C to abort, almost any other key for status
0g 0:00:00:12 0g/s 0p/s 877393Kc/s 1267MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:14 0g/s 0p/s 835613Kc/s 1169MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:15 0g/s 0p/s 857896Kc/s 1247MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:16 0g/s 0p/s 877393Kc/s 1316MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:18 0g/s 0p/s 844897Kc/s 1364MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:19 0g/s 0p/s 862001Kc/s 1416MC/s jayotuhb..loveaovd
0g 0:00:00:46 0g/s 0p/s 839246Kc/s 1246MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
campbell (u1822-des)
1g 0:00:00:47 0.02086g/s 0p/s 846280Kc/s 1244MC/s campbell..loveaovd
1g 0:00:00:49 0.02027g/s 0p/s 835613Kc/s 1217MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
[...]
manageme (u2347-des)
10g 0:00:07:19 0.02276g/s 0p/s 831425Kc/s 1183MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
jethrotu (u1131-bigcrypt:1)
jeepster (u2212-des)
metallic (u706-des)
13g 0:00:08:31 0.02543g/s 0p/s 831034Kc/s 1179MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
michigan (u2378-des)
14g 0:00:09:30 0.02455g/s 0p/s 831215Kc/s 1173MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
peterpan (u2501-des)
butterfl (u1812-bigcrypt:1)
californ (u970-bigcrypt:1)
17g 0:00:10:40 0.02653g/s 0p/s 831696Kc/s 1177MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
lissabon (u2310-des)
[...]
babydoll (u921-des)
91g 0:00:47:05 0.03220g/s 0p/s 831117Kc/s 1212MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
bluejean (u1775-des)
moonbeam (u2405-des)
motorola (u2409-des)
shanghai (u2653-des)
alexandr (u534-des)
lonestar (u2319-des)
jethrotu (u1131-des)
98g 0:00:52:29 0.03111g/s 0p/s 831049Kc/s 1210MC/s loveaaaa..loveaovd
paradigm (u2479-des)
99g 0:00:52:37 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 08:05) 0.03135g/s 370489p/s 831166Kc/s 1211MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
promethe (u1286-des)
100g 0:00:52:50 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 08:43) 0.03154g/s 369009p/s 831079Kc/s 1211MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
kristine (u2280-des)
101g 0:00:54:27 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 13:32) 0.03091g/s 358039p/s 831111Kc/s 1211MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
treasure (u2814-des)
102g 0:00:56:00 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 18:09) 0.03035g/s 348136p/s 831087Kc/s 1214MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
chainsaw (u1843-des)
promethe (u1286-bigcrypt:1)
softball (u3082-des)
105g 0:00:56:58 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 21:01) 0.03071g/s 342261p/s 831017Kc/s 1212MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
transpor (u2809-bigcrypt:1)
superman (u334-des)
107g 0:00:57:54 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-07 23:48) 0.03079g/s 336714p/s 831091Kc/s 1211MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaovd
Comparing this to the results I posted earlier, standard clocks:
brewster (u1794-des)
99g 0:00:49:45 0.49% (ETA: 2017-07-06 17:59) 0.03316g/s 342899p/s 806212Kc/s 1168MC/s lynnaaaa..lynnaays
superman (u334-des)
100g 0:00:54:43 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-06 11:37) 0.03045g/s 356327p/s 806126Kc/s 1168MC/s suno####..jmbp####
Old 5% overclock (w/o the hack):
brewster (u1794-des)
99g 0:00:47:39 0.49% (ETA: 2017-07-06 09:17) 0.03462g/s 358015p/s 840055Kc/s 1217MC/s lynnaaaa..lynnaays
superman (u334-des)
100g 0:00:52:15 0.56% (ETA: 2017-07-06 02:43) 0.03189g/s 373136p/s 839891Kc/s 1218MC/s sunoaaaa..sunoaays
So in terms of passwords cracked, this hack is similar to but not
exactly at the 5% overclock level, but without the overclock. It will
probably be of a lot more help with multiple boards per host, but I
might as well guess wrong.
Alexander
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.
