Is my plan a good idea?
#21
epixoip

Going by your comment of making an indexed look up table. Did you mean something like this?

https://github.com/moloch--/hashlookup

EDIT: I've had a play around with those scripts and I've got to say it seems like a pretty good idea. It actually creates the index a lot faster than we thought. It does it for me at around 2MB/s. Which means it would take just 13 hours to index 100GB of wordlists. I've tried with a 1GB list already and the time it takes to parse the index is really quite impressive.

For a 1GB wordlist it passes a 100K hash list in 5 seconds.
And passes 1 hash in 0.001 seconds.

Making an index like this for many GB of wordlists would make an incredible hash cracking website.
Reply
#22
That's not quite what I meant, though that is one approach. I imagine this doesn't scale very well though, and that's likely why most "hash cracking websites" limit you to 10-15 hashes.
Reply
#23
(01-02-2015, 01:26 AM)epixoip Wrote: That's not quite what I meant, though that is one approach. I imagine this doesn't scale very well though, and that's likely why most "hash cracking websites" limit you to 10-15 hashes.

I don't see why so many hash cracking websites are so bad though. The success rate is very minimal, the best free one is probably hashes.org, and they only use their own wordlist which is 2.5GB.

If lots of good hash crackers kipped together and shared their wordlists they could make one hell of a good site and make a bit of cash out of it.
Reply
#24
They're bad because straight wordlist attacks aren't usually high yield, which has been my point through this whole thread.
Reply