![]() |
New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - Printable Version +- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum) +-- Forum: Developer (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-39.html) +--- Forum: Beta Tester (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-31.html) +--- Thread: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack (/thread-9534.html) |
RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - undeath - 10-01-2020 (10-01-2020, 06:43 PM)ciccio17 Wrote: … This attack mode is specifically designed for large salted hash lists. It doesn't make sense with single hashes. RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - svobodnui11 - 10-02-2020 to see an example in action, in the same video RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - nielsenjens463 - 01-08-2021 Have tryed on bcrypt this Association Attack, 0% recovered. did i did something wrong? Have split usernames in 1 file called wordlist.txt and hashes in another called EPWhashes.txt Or it could be that all salts are random and has nothing to do with the usernames? I have also seperate emails with every hash. Shall i try emails instead of usernames as a salt hint or there is no chance to improve speed? trying straight on bcrypt but it shows 66years to be finished with because i have only 1 GPU 1080TI 11gb Session..........: hashcat Status...........: Exhausted Hash.Name........: bcrypt $2*$, Blowfish (Unix) Hash.Target......: ./UPWhashes.txt Time.Started.....: Fri Jan 08 11:30:36 2021 (4 mins, 10 secs) Time.Estimated...: Fri Jan 08 11:34:46 2021 (0 secs) Guess.Base.......: File (./wordlist.txt) Guess.Queue......: 1/1 (100.00%) Speed.#1.........: 422 H/s (161.48ms) @ Accel:8 Loops:32 Thr:11 Vec:1 Recovered........: 0/105330 (0.00%) Digests, 0/105330 (0.00%) Salts Remaining........: 105330 (100.00%) Digests, 105330 (100.00%) Salts Recovered/Time...: CUR:0,N/A,N/A AVG:0,0,0 (Min,Hour,Day) Progress.........: 210659/105330 (200.00%) Rejected.........: 105330/210659 (50.00%) Restore.Point....: 105330/105330 (100.00%) RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - royce - 01-15-2021 Test your attack against a known set of bcrypt hashes and their plains. Once that's working, you'll know that your method is correct. RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - asaj2kk - 02-11-2021 Can confirm that on optimized kernels I get erros as well clEnqueueWriteBuffer(): CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES clWaitForEvents(): CL_UNKNOWN_ERROR clEnqueueReadBuffer(): CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES This wouldn't be a problem but -m 2711 doesn't have a pure kernel only optimized. Is there a fix for it or does it have to do on how you build hashcat ? msys build < error wsl build < error RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - Snoopy - 04-29-2021 what about the idea to use the --username option to trigger this attack to do the (at least now) needed manual splitting on the fly? so instead of using 2 separate files you can stick to the already there [user:pw ![]() RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - pokosima1999 - 01-26-2022 Is potfile support? RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - Snoopy - 01-26-2022 (01-26-2022, 07:51 AM)pokosima1999 Wrote: Is potfile support? dont know what you mean, but in the potfile the standard hash : [salt] : plain is stored RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - moahmed - 01-28-2022 Hello i guess that the password is only 11 digit what i must write to check only 11 digit not passed to 8.9.10 digit only 11 like digits like crunch RE: New Attack-Mode: Association Attack - ZerBea - 01-28-2022 If someone is interested: Association attack on hash mode 22000 on ESSID: Code: $ cat hashfile.hc22000 | awk 'BEGIN { FS = "*" } ; {print "$HEX[" $6 "]" }' > essid.list on ESSID with rules: Code: $ cat hashfile.hc22000 | awk 'BEGIN { FS = "*" } ; {print "$HEX[" $6 "]" }' > essid.list On MAC_AP: Code: $ cat hashfile.hc22000 | awk 'BEGIN { FS = "*" } ; {print $4 }' > macap.list Outfile (-o) should be used because there are no entries in the potfile (up to actual git head: hashcat v6.2.5-165-gb44495846) |