+- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum)
+-- Forum: Misc (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-15.html)
+--- Forum: Organisation and Events (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: Please vote (/thread-6289.html)
Please vote - atom - 02-10-2017
I can increase rule-based attack speed but for the price of a decreased brute-force attack speed.
I can not guarantee the numbers, but after the change all modes will have the same speed.
The speed will be slower to what combinator-mode is doing right now and depend on the hash-mode.
For NTLM, only half the speed of combinator attack
For SHA256, almost the same speed of combinator attack
Note: This is for fast hashes (NTLM, MD5, VB, etc) only. Slow hashes speeds don't change.
RE: Please vote - Chick3nman - 02-10-2017
I'm in favor of the trade off.
RE: Please vote - Psycho - 02-10-2017
TRADE OFF!
RE: Please vote - LSDoom - 02-10-2017
Faster rules all day.
RE: Please vote - d2 - 02-10-2017
Yeah! New algo!
No, wait. Wrong thread.
Yes, do it atom :-)
RE: Please vote - atom - 02-10-2017
For those haven't seen it: There's a voting system on top of this thread
RE: Please vote - blandyuk - 02-10-2017
I'm in favour but, its a shame brute-force it taking a hit. I presume the classes / interfaces are linked in hashcat which is why this is causing this to happen?
Back in the old days, hashcat was split into 2 apps. Because of this, this issue would never occur.
Surely hashcat can accommodate this without a sacrifice? Is it not the crackers way for speed!
I do realise it would be a lot of work but worth it and we would have the best of both worlds.
RE: Please vote - mahan - 02-11-2017
Why brute-force attack speed will decrease after changes?
RE: Please vote - epixoip - 02-11-2017
Brute force is for noobs.
RE: Please vote - atom - 02-11-2017
OK, poll is closed now. Bad thing is that I've found in the meanwhile that the idea didn't work out, so everything will stay as-is