Posts: 57
	Threads: 16
	Joined: Jan 2015
	
	
 
	
		
		
		08-07-2017, 08:21 PM 
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2017, 08:22 PM by zamgold.)
		
	 
	
		I Have very big dictionary (10 Gb)
I want run hashcat with this dictionary + best64.rule, I know that the password is more than 7 characters long.
It is possible to set the minimum length of the password when starting the cracking?
	
	
	
	
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 352
	Threads: 3
	Joined: May 2010
	
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 57
	Threads: 16
	Joined: Jan 2015
	
	
 
	
	
		 (08-07-2017, 08:44 PM)Xanadrel Wrote:  https://hashcat.net/wiki/doku.php?id=rul...ect_plains
for example, i must edit best64.rule:
## simple number append
>7 $0
>7 $1
>7 $2
>7 $3
>7 $4
>7 $5
....
Coreectly?
	
 
	
	
	
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 2,301
	Threads: 11
	Joined: Jul 2010
	
	
 
	
	
		You can specify multiple rule files and hashcat will join every rule of the first file with every rule of the second file and so on. So you can just specify a rule file containing the rule ">7" and then the best64.rule file. Although you probably want it the other way around.
	
	
	
	
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 2,266
	Threads: 16
	Joined: Feb 2013
	
	
 
	
	
		from 
https://hashcat.net/wiki/doku.php?id=rul...ect_plains :
Quote:Reject rules only work either with hashcat-legacy, or when using “-j” or “-k” with hashcat. They will not work as regular rules (in a rule file) with hashcat
	 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 1
	Threads: 0
	Joined: Sep 2017
	
	
 
	
	
		Hi,
I'm having the same challenge as OP: large wordlist (15G), want to use rules, would like to skip passwords under certain length. However I am puzzled by the given answers in this thread.
AIUI reject rules can't be used with -a0, because they can only be used with -j and -k, thus in a combinator attack. 
Of course using stdout is an option, but then I'd have to somehow use the shell to skip small words, which sounds resource inefficient.
Writing everything to disk first, while cut'ing short words, then deduping, is also not an ideal option, since this obviously will generate a lot of disk I/O slowing down the entire exercise (not to mention that it probably will require an enormous amount of diskspace).
What's the recommended approach here? 
Thanks