06-10-2013, 10:43 AM
So I've got numbers people was waiting for.
Good news first, the supported slow hashes:
They will -not- drop in speed at all.
More good news is that due to the new caching model GPU's do no more require huge dictionaries or large amplifiers to fully utilize them and that's for all hashes.
Also, host memory requirements are less than before.
Bad News, the fast hashes like raw MD5 will drop. But that was to as expect and I said it couple of times.
Multi hash (500k hashes):
Brute-Force++/Mask: 2091 -> 1969 = 5.8%
Hybrid/Combinator: 1960 -> 1642 = 16.2%
Straight/Rules: 1081 -> 723 = 33.1%
The single hash numbers are a bit higher, but when we talk about fast hashes I think we're primarily talking about multihash cracking.
I was working hard for the last week to keep the loss as low as possible.
Just one thing to note. There can be no "old" method to stick to the high speeds with support less than 15 chars as many people already suggested.
The changes I made are to deep, they are no longer compatible and I dont want to maintain two different tools.
I'm just experimenting with this new model, maybe there is something I can do which I haven't notice yet.
Good news first, the supported slow hashes:
- phpass, MD5(Wordpress), MD5(phpBB3)
- md5crypt, MD5(Unix), FreeBSD MD5, Cisco-IOS MD5
- md5apr1, MD5(APR), Apache MD5
- sha512crypt, SHA512(Unix)
- Domain Cached Credentials2, mscash2
- WPA/WPA2
- bcrypt, Blowfish(OpenBSD)
- Password Safe SHA-256
- TrueCrypt
- 1Password
- Lastpass
They will -not- drop in speed at all.
More good news is that due to the new caching model GPU's do no more require huge dictionaries or large amplifiers to fully utilize them and that's for all hashes.
Also, host memory requirements are less than before.
Bad News, the fast hashes like raw MD5 will drop. But that was to as expect and I said it couple of times.
Multi hash (500k hashes):
Brute-Force++/Mask: 2091 -> 1969 = 5.8%
Hybrid/Combinator: 1960 -> 1642 = 16.2%
Straight/Rules: 1081 -> 723 = 33.1%
The single hash numbers are a bit higher, but when we talk about fast hashes I think we're primarily talking about multihash cracking.
I was working hard for the last week to keep the loss as low as possible.
Just one thing to note. There can be no "old" method to stick to the high speeds with support less than 15 chars as many people already suggested.
The changes I made are to deep, they are no longer compatible and I dont want to maintain two different tools.
I'm just experimenting with this new model, maybe there is something I can do which I haven't notice yet.