+- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum)
+-- Forum: Support (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: hashcat (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: Crack a long list efficiently (/thread-5750.html)
Pages:
1
2
Crack a long list efficiently - thomja1 - 08-13-2016
Hello
So I want to start of by saying that this is not my area of expertise at all. I did search through the FAQ and could not find the answer to my question.
Say I have a list of hashes... Like 100k
Is there any way for me to run something hashcat in a way that instead of it going through the entire rockyou.txt for each password, that it goes through one word in rockyou.txt and then checks if it matches ANY of the hashes in the list?
Thanks
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - hashcrash - 08-13-2016
But that's what hashcat does, isn't it?
(IAt least as long as there's no individual salt on each hash.).
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - royce - 08-13-2016
Of course hashcat does this - even if there are different salts. Anything else would be bizarre.
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - thomja1 - 08-13-2016
But when I run the program it says that it will take an approx of 49 days to finish.
Isn't it a bit odd that it takes a GTX 980 49 days to go through the rockyou.txt?
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - atom - 08-14-2016
Why's that odd, it depends on the hash-type
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - neo79 - 08-19-2016
you need more power, plus ati is better at cracking, nividi is better for games
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - atom - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 04:58 AM)neo79 Wrote: you need more power, plus ati is better at cracking, nividi is better for games
Not any longer, it changed in the meanwhile
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - neo79 - 08-23-2016
really so is ati still better than a gtx 980 8mb or are we talking about the new gtx 1080
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - azren - 08-24-2016
(08-23-2016, 04:18 PM)neo79 Wrote: really so is ati still better than a gtx 980 8mb or are we talking about the new gtx 1080
GTX 980 is about 23% faster than R9 290X with half the power consumption (meaning less heat).
Check this out https://gist.github.com/epixoip/abd64f1af800013abb1f
I beleive it should be in the following order...
GTX Titan XP
GTX 1080
GTX Titan X
GTX 1070
GTX 1060
GTX 980 Ti
GTX 980
GTX 970
R9 290X
R9 290
HD 9970 / R9 280X
Best regards,
Azren
RE: Crack a long list efficiently - blazer - 08-24-2016
I always see the nvidia vs amd comparison, but people generally don't provide the full picture. So I'll say it.
Nvidia is generally faster for attacks including bruteforce, combo related attacks. HOWEVER, if you intend on running lots of rules and wordlists on fast algos with a relatively large hashlist you will notice that a 290x may give you close to double the perf of a 1080.
1x GTX1080: Speed 1000 MH/s
1x R9-290x: Speed 1999 MH/s
This was tested with HC3.0 on fast algo SHA1 pass salt with a large hashlist, wordlist and rules. << Take note of this specific requirement.
This may have changed with the latest version slightly in nvidias favor.
So while nvidia will win in MOST cases for power efficiency /value, it's not true 100% of the time. I think this is important as some people may believe getting an nvidia card will get them fastest hashrate under all situations.
If you are happy to put up with excessive power draw (especially through PCIE) and don't mind the noise, run a lot of dict+rule attacks on large hashlists for particular algos then AMD cards could be useful to you.