Posts: 43
Threads: 14
Joined: Nov 2014
i use a file mask for WPA, in the file i have this :
1234567890,ABC,?2?2?2?1?2?1?1?1?1 (4 MINUTES AND 40 SEC)
1234567890,ABD,?2?2?2?1?2?1?1?1?1 (11 MINUTES AND 50 SEC)
1234567890,ABE,?2?2?2?1?2?1?1?1?1 (28 MINUTES AND 30 SEC)
Why is there a difference in time ??
Posts: 43
Threads: 14
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 230
Joined: Apr 2010
I've tested this but can't reproduce. How did you check the timers?
Posts: 9
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Try
1234567890,ABC,?2?2?2?1?2?1?1?1?1
1234567890,,ABD,?3?3?3?1?3?1?1?1?1
1234567890,,,ABE,?4?4?4?1?4?1?1?1?1
Posts: 43
Threads: 14
Joined: Nov 2014
(11-19-2015, 12:10 PM)atom Wrote: I've tested this but can't reproduce. How did you check the timers?
wpamask.png (Size: 40.22 KB / Downloads: 18)
Posts: 43
Threads: 14
Joined: Nov 2014
(11-20-2015, 12:14 AM)PutNick Wrote: Try
1234567890,ABC,?2?2?2?1?2?1?1?1?1
1234567890,,ABD,?3?3?3?1?3?1?1?1?1
1234567890,,,ABE,?4?4?4?1?4?1?1?1?1
work fine thank you PutNick
Posts: 2,267
Threads: 16
Joined: Feb 2013
cr4zynou, I am pretty confident that you are not using the newest version of oclHashcat.
Because this looks *exactly* like the bug that was fixed with this ticket
https://hashcat.net/trac/ticket/617 already with the release of version 1.37. So you must be using version 1.36 or an earlier version.
If that is true (and as already said I am pretty sure this is the case here, because with version <= 1.36 I get the *very* same numbers/problem), that is pretty evil to report a problem where you claim this is a (still) existing bug/problem without even letting us know which version of oclHashcat you are using etc. It would be very kind of you if you at least try with the newest version before reporting a problem.
So for the future:
1. always update to the lastest version
2. check if a similar problem was already fixed (or at least reported on trac)
3. specify the exact version, GPU model etc when reporting a problem
...
