02-14-2018, 08:37 AM
No, this is correct. The number of password candidates is way too huge.
Just do the math ?a has 95 characters. If we have a length of 15, we have 95^15.
The result of 95*95*95*95*....*95 (15 times) is 463291230159753366058349609375 .
This is a very huge number and can't be represented with a 64-bit unsigned integer variable. The hexadecimal equivalent would be 0x5D8F98607A262F810DB9FC19F and this means you would need to have at least 128 bit variables.... but that would not matter/help at all here, because the attack is just infeasible and would not finish within hundreds/thousands of years with a very good setup.
Here you can read about what --keyspace does: https://hashcat.net/wiki/doku.php?id=fre...a_keyspace
... and yes, the value of --keyspace is smaller than the maximum 64-bit unsigned integer number, but still other values like the number of password candidates is too large and can't be represented.
Just do the math ?a has 95 characters. If we have a length of 15, we have 95^15.
The result of 95*95*95*95*....*95 (15 times) is 463291230159753366058349609375 .
This is a very huge number and can't be represented with a 64-bit unsigned integer variable. The hexadecimal equivalent would be 0x5D8F98607A262F810DB9FC19F and this means you would need to have at least 128 bit variables.... but that would not matter/help at all here, because the attack is just infeasible and would not finish within hundreds/thousands of years with a very good setup.
Here you can read about what --keyspace does: https://hashcat.net/wiki/doku.php?id=fre...a_keyspace
... and yes, the value of --keyspace is smaller than the maximum 64-bit unsigned integer number, but still other values like the number of password candidates is too large and can't be represented.