+- 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: hashcat v 4.0.0 (/thread-6926.html)
hashcat v 4.0.0 - TesTergH - 10-09-2017
Hello
As I see on github is already version 4.0.0 :
https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/blob/master/docs/changes.txt
I am interesting in feature “Added support to crack passwords and salts up to length 256”
When you plan to release new version?
Is it possible to download v4.0.0 binaries for Windows right now?
Thank you!
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - undeath - 10-09-2017
https://hashcat.net/beta/
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - TesTergH - 10-09-2017
(10-09-2017, 11:06 PM)undeath Wrote: https://hashcat.net/beta/
Thank you!
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - Mem5 - 10-10-2017
I tried the rc2 and had a huge drop in NTLM performance, on GTX 1080+1070
Am I the only one ?
Benchmark NTLM:
v3.6 : 73'607'804'349 H/s
v4.0.0 rc2 : 27'007'417'122 H/s
v4.0.0 rc3 : 26'301'910'948 H/s
Ratio : ~ -172%
cmd line was : hashcat64.exe -b -w 3 -m 1000 --machine-readable
Driver : 387.92
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - Chick3nman - 10-10-2017
That would be the new kernels, supporting the plaintext/salt lengths of up to 256, making your speeds seem slower. Speed isn't free. If you want more speed, you need to do things like limit plaintext lengths. If you want to run the faster, but shorter length limited kernels, use the -O flag, O = Optimized kernels.
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - undeath - 10-10-2017
@Chick3nman: he's using -b and hence should be using optimized kernels already I think. My single 1060 pulls roughly 20 GH/s, so a 1070 + 1080 should be faster than 27 GH/s. Wouldn't that be about the performance of a single card?
using -O in benchmark mode produces the exact same speed for me.
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - Chick3nman - 10-10-2017
@undeath unless behavior has changed recently, I thought the optimized kernels had to be specified and that benchmark mode would be using the new kernels by default. I remember this being pretty heavily debated in the IRC and I'm on the side that it should us the optimized by default to lessen confusion for people upgrading, but i'm not sure if it was ever switched from new-default to optimized-default. Let me do a fresh pull and check.
Update: Just pulled fresh
>hashcat (4.0.0-rc4) starting in benchmark mode...
>Active options: -w 2
>
>Benchmarking uses hand-optimized kernel code by default.
>You can use it in your cracking session by setting the -O option.
>Note: Using optimized kernel code limits the maximum supported password length.
>To disable the optimized kernel code in benchmark mode, use the -w option.
He IS using the new kernels because he is specifying "-w 3", however you are correct that optimized kernels have become the default now.
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - Mem5 - 10-10-2017
# hashcat (4.0.0-rc4) tests:
hashcat64.exe -b -w 3 -m 1000 --machine-readable
gives 27'292'689'606
hashcat64.exe -b -w 3 -m 1000 -O --machine-readable
gives 77'160'705'549
So.. I should always use optimized kernels, right ?
When one (like me) put -w AND -O, it seems -O wins ?
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - undeath - 10-10-2017
Looks like -w 3 in benchmark mode for some reason also implies not using optimized kernels (which can be turned on again by specifying -O). That's a little confusing.
RE: hashcat v 4.0.0 - atom - 10-11-2017
Why would someone use -w in combination with -b unless he's somehow experienced. The option -b set automatically -w 3 by default.