![]() |
number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - Printable Version +- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum) +-- Forum: Support (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-3.html) +--- Forum: hashcat-utils, maskprocessor, statsprocessor, md5stress, wikistrip (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-28.html) +--- Thread: number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type (/thread-10924.html) |
number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - joe123 - 08-06-2022 Hello forum would like to find out how many passwords Hashcat has to test for following password with the following mask: - the password does consist in; a-zA-Z0-9 and (the following 3 chars) - _ & (are that in total 65 chars ?) - max password length: 10 chars Content of mask.file: ?l?u?d-_&,?1?1?1?1?1?1?1?1?1?1 Command: hashcat -m1000 -a3 -O -w3 --increment hash.txt mask.file (Thank's to user Snoopy who helped me to craft this mask ![]() Could somebody please explain me how to calculate the number of required attemps? Thank you very much! Joe RE: number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - b8vr - 08-06-2022 With 65 chars and up to 10 char long password, there will be 65^10 (or 1,34627433E+18) options. So.... a lot!!! RE: number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - wallacebw - 08-07-2022 Not perfect, but a good tool to ballpark generic keyspaces. https://www.grc.com/haystack.htm as b8vr stated for you it is: [a-z] = 26 + [A-Z] = 26 + [0-9] = 10 + - _ & = 3 ----------------------- 26+26+10+3 = 65 charset = 65 pw length = 10 ----------------------- keyspace = 65^10 65^10 = 1,346,274,334,462,890,625 = 1.346274334×10¹⁸ RE: number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - DanielG - 08-08-2022 And to put it into perspective, using a NVIDIA RTX 3080 TI card, and assuming it can maintain a steady 117.4 GH/s speed means: 1,346,274,334,462,890,625 / 117,400,000,000 = 133 days of full time 24 hours per day cracking to go through them all. RE: number of attemps with a mask for a NTLM hash type - joe123 - 08-08-2022 Thank's a lot to each of you for your feedback! Unfortunately I can't afford to setup an adequate lab for such a task ![]() |