Lotus HTTP Hash
#13
(05-06-2010, 09:09 AM)atom Wrote: never heared of this algo. are you sure that this important for a bigger number of users? i try to add it in a later version, but i will give it a lower priority until more users reply to this thread asking for support.

+1 for the dominosec/G-hash format. It is actually still somewhat common among large companies. The older lotus5 type is lower priority as it is more manageable with CPU based crackers. dominosec on john runs around 100k c/s compared to 140M c/s for lotus5.


Messages In This Thread
Lotus HTTP Hash - by subgenius - 05-05-2010, 06:04 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by atom - 05-06-2010, 09:09 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by subgenius - 05-06-2010, 07:37 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by rajak - 09-22-2012, 12:45 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by DrMambo - 11-25-2011, 01:34 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by neusbeer - 11-26-2011, 07:02 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by robert - 12-16-2011, 11:34 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by olsap - 12-28-2011, 10:19 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by ati6990 - 12-28-2011, 04:25 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by gtcreator - 01-21-2012, 01:56 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by bghote - 01-22-2012, 12:00 AM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by alexTr - 01-26-2012, 08:19 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by Tommy - 02-23-2012, 12:28 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by thebug - 10-18-2012, 03:43 PM
RE: Lotus HTTP Hash - by Bitweasil - 10-21-2012, 06:45 PM