04-27-2020, 11:47 AM
-o is wrong in your command line. --outfile (or short -o) is only used for redirecting the output to a file (the results).
you need to specify the hash like this:
for the other part it's difficult to say if mask attack is much faster compared to other approaches.... it could even turn out that a simple perl/python script with pipe/stdin -a 0 will be fast enough and easier to use:
you could even use stdin/pipe together with rules for hashcat (add "-r my.rules" at the right).
yeah, you could use maskprocessor to generate a huge list of masks (using ?l), or use any other scripting language to generate hcmask files that fit your specific use case (e.g. a new python/perl script that adds ?l at some positions in the string and outputs a list of masks, i.e. a hcmask file).
The problem is that your situation is very specific and there isn't a perfect off-the-shelf solution, I would say.
Since 7-Zip is a very slow hash type, it probably doesn't matter too much if you use -a 0 (maybe with rules) or -a 3 with hcmask files.... but in general you shouldn't use mask attacks with a very long static/hard-coded beginning (since it can't be accelerated a lot).
I think your approach is okay using hcmask files (but you still could consider if rule based attacks, maybe by even using the multi rule feature: -r first.rule -r second.rule, would also work for you)... the problem is however how many different masks it would require and if it's still feasible with that huge length (fortunately you only have 1 "password candidate" and not more passwords to choose from).
in general, for the hcmask approach I would recommend starting with a smaller length and add some ?l and afterwards increase the length. You could put the list of masks down by hand or generate them by a script (with increasing length and additional ?l as the mask length increases).
you need to specify the hash like this:
Code:
hashcat -m 11600 -a 3 -w 3 extracted.hash combinations.hcmaskfor the other part it's difficult to say if mask attack is much faster compared to other approaches.... it could even turn out that a simple perl/python script with pipe/stdin -a 0 will be fast enough and easier to use:
Code:
python my_perfect_special_password_generator.py | hashcat -m 11600 -a 0 -w 3 lost.hashyou could even use stdin/pipe together with rules for hashcat (add "-r my.rules" at the right).
yeah, you could use maskprocessor to generate a huge list of masks (using ?l), or use any other scripting language to generate hcmask files that fit your specific use case (e.g. a new python/perl script that adds ?l at some positions in the string and outputs a list of masks, i.e. a hcmask file).
The problem is that your situation is very specific and there isn't a perfect off-the-shelf solution, I would say.
Since 7-Zip is a very slow hash type, it probably doesn't matter too much if you use -a 0 (maybe with rules) or -a 3 with hcmask files.... but in general you shouldn't use mask attacks with a very long static/hard-coded beginning (since it can't be accelerated a lot).
I think your approach is okay using hcmask files (but you still could consider if rule based attacks, maybe by even using the multi rule feature: -r first.rule -r second.rule, would also work for you)... the problem is however how many different masks it would require and if it's still feasible with that huge length (fortunately you only have 1 "password candidate" and not more passwords to choose from).
in general, for the hcmask approach I would recommend starting with a smaller length and add some ?l and afterwards increase the length. You could put the list of masks down by hand or generate them by a script (with increasing length and additional ?l as the mask length increases).