Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2020
I google searched many place and people's talk and conclusion was that hashcat is fastest at password cracking which is why I am here now.
on my other thread I have questions on how to use commands and stuff but to crack a .7z password command I used is this:
"hashcat64.exe -m 11600 -a 3 hash.txt"
this brute force 7zip archive for all character combination lower/upper case, digits + special char I assume? I get about ~5500 h/s
however I use another software called parallel password recovery for 7z file which disabling cpu and only using GPU, I can get about average 9500 pw/s.
how is this software almost twice as fast and how can I improve hashcat performance? one thing I did notice is that if I use hashcat even though GPU almost always between 98-99% usage, I can still play game, browse or watch video. where as parallel password recovery its average also 99% but everything I do graphic related lags meaning GPU is really stressed.
how can I improve performance in hashcat?
Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2020
bump, could someone that knows difference tell me how they differ. one is hash/s the other is pw/s, isn't hash also finding password? im a bit confused.
Posts: 107
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2018
Considering your previous posts, you seem to be new to password cracking and therefore are lacking necessary background knowledge (which is not a shame, everyone started at some point). You should do some research about the differences between Hashing and Encryption, as well as how both of them are usually used together.
A short answer: Hash functions are used to derive keys for encryption by considering your password and in most cases some other random data, which is called salt. If you are trying to crack a single hash, this is not important for you, as it does not have an impact on performance.
Important in your case is that hash functions may be applied multiple times to finally derive the encryption key. This means in order to check if a password is correct, you might have to compute e.g. sha256(sha256(...sha(pw|salt)...)), potentially up to 200,000 times to check a single password.
This should also answer your question from your other thread, why it is not possible use plain sha256 (-m 1400) in order to crack a 7z hash.
Posts: 2,267
Threads: 16
Joined: Feb 2013
Did you try to test -m 11600 with the beta version from
https://hashcat.net/beta , it has several improvements for hook code (see
https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/commi...7f6c2ed837).
Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2020
(01-24-2020, 11:26 AM)NoReply Wrote: Considering your previous posts, you seem to be new to password cracking and therefore are lacking necessary background knowledge (which is not a shame, everyone started at some point). You should do some research about the differences between Hashing and Encryption, as well as how both of them are usually used together.
A short answer: Hash functions are used to derive keys for encryption by considering your password and in most cases some other random data, which is called salt. If you are trying to crack a single hash, this is not important for you, as it does not have an impact on performance.
Important in your case is that hash functions may be applied multiple times to finally derive the encryption key. This means in order to check if a password is correct, you might have to compute e.g. sha256(sha256(...sha(pw|salt)...)), potentially up to 200,000 times to check a single password.
This should also answer your question from your other thread, why it is not possible use plain sha256 (-m 1400) in order to crack a 7z hash.
thank you for replying. though I am new, my understanding is that these software should be very similar to hashcat unless I am wrong. unless theres actually less hashes than there are passwords combination thus that having 5500h/ssec is actually faster than having 9500 passwords tested/sec, which would mean the software that im using isn't faster than hashcat and also very different.
Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2020
(01-24-2020, 11:58 AM)philsmd Wrote: Did you try to test -m 11600 with the beta version from https://hashcat.net/beta , it has several improvements for hook code (see https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/commi...7f6c2ed837).
no i havent but I will try it
Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2020
@philsmd
i am already with hashcat 5.1 i recently downloaded like a week ago, does it include this new change?
Posts: 803
Threads: 135
Joined: Feb 2011
The one on the homepage is not the same as the one on the beta page.
The latest is beta. Try with it.
