Bug with complex rule ?
#4
Hey Waffle,
while I agree with most (if not all) of your suggestions here (https://hashcat.net/trac/ticket/148 ) , I also think that it is not really the solution for this problem (or perfectly related to this bug).

The suggested output format would indeed help to understand what has been checked and what the real matching plaintext was, but the problem here is that I/we currently don't understand why "1\00002" is even considered with those rules and dict (because in my opinion it shouldn't). Also here https://hashcat.net/trac/ticket/154 in my opinion the \00 shouldn't be concatened with those rules since it isn't in the dict... This is the real problem/bug we are trying to understand here...

... but yes another (and most importantly working) output format could/should be able to help us to understand what is going on here.


Messages In This Thread
Bug with complex rule ? - by Mem5 - 06-01-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by philsmd - 06-01-2013, 06:15 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by Waffle - 06-01-2013, 07:33 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by philsmd - 06-01-2013, 08:08 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by Waffle - 06-01-2013, 09:18 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by jackdorsey - 06-28-2013, 09:03 PM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by philsmd - 06-02-2013, 06:47 AM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by epixoip - 06-10-2013, 09:54 AM
RE: Bug with complex rule ? - by Rolf - 06-10-2013, 10:22 AM