Posts: 2,266
Threads: 16
Joined: Feb 2013
@joris pls open a new forum thread where we can discuss the SAP H feature request. Furthermore, we should add this feature request also to trac (
https://hashcat.net/trac/ ).
I think main problem is that the full hash-algo details about SAP H hashes is still unknown (at least I don't know how those hashes can be generated). Without full details about the algorithm it is not possible to implement it in oclHashcat of course. We may also need to have some sample hashes etc (being aware of forum rules, do not post hashes).
Pls open forum thread/trac ticket to discuss this further. Thx
Posts: 5,232
Threads: 233
Joined: Apr 2010
(10-09-2014, 02:45 PM)Hash-IT Wrote: Good point, it would be nice if the options above grouped all archive algorithms as one option. It's very hard for members to pick one archive type as they are all important.
The Items are listed as they are by purpose
It's a lot of work to add just one single algorithm...
Posts: 723
Threads: 85
Joined: Apr 2011
(10-09-2014, 02:57 PM)atom Wrote: The Items are listed as they are by purpose
It's a lot of work to add just one single algorithm...
I totally understand it must be difficult to add these
It's just from the "users" side it is incredibly tormenting to have to pick 1 LOL. Just my luck I will need to recover an unsupported archive !!
I suspect any member voting for 1 archive type would secretly wish for all archive types to be supported.
AARRGHH, I also LOVE the table-lookup attack, this has to be the most agonising poll on the internet !! LOL
Posts: 2,301
Threads: 11
Joined: Jul 2010
Seeing the "No new algorithm, add true support for utf-16" option reminds me that true UTF-8 support would be great. Like UTF-8 aware rules, masks aso.
Posts: 247
Threads: 59
Joined: Mar 2011
10-09-2014, 09:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-15-2014, 11:49 PM by Kgx Pnqvhm.)
Does the "No new algorithm, add CPU support" mean that the classic CPU Hashcat is no longer being developed?
Would the "CPU support" mean that the Purge rule would then be supported, as opposed to having to use CPU hashcat for them?
Posts: 2
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2014
10-10-2014, 10:24 AM
It's like being a kid in a candy store
Posts: 723
Threads: 85
Joined: Apr 2011
Well after a long time agonising over this I have had to vote for the table-lookup attack. I asked for that feature in oclhashcat a long time ago so it would be wrong of me not to vote for it now.
I can see that, as suspected, the archive decryption is very popular. I could not pick just one of the archive types so I am pleased others have made the decision for me LOL.
If I had a multiple choice, in order of preference, my list would be...
RAR 3.x
zip
RAR 5.x
7zip
table-lookup attack
KeePass
Thanks for all the work you do and for giving us the opportunity to vote
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2014
Make custom algorithms to easily add :]
Posts: 7
Threads: 2
Joined: Apr 2013
If I was going to rank the few things I can't easily distribute on our cluster that I have to deal with on a regular basis it would be.
rar3
zip
pdfs
Posts: 30
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2013
