[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D8BDD9E.4090709@bredband.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 01:11:10 +0100
From: magnum <rawsmooth@...dband.net>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: NTLM scalability improve
On 2011-03-24 22:42, Alain Espinosa wrote:
> Changes to NTLM format to perform better with huge number of hashes.
>
> As you can see the improve is significant.
You can say that again! I tried it with 2M test hashes. Without this
patch, just _loading_ them took 47 seconds, then the c/s was reported as
31200M (even though the initial loading time does not affect the c/s
figure).
With the patch, loading them took about 2 seconds, after which it
completed inc:digits in about 39 seconds (still 6 seconds before the
unpatched version even had started cracking!). And speed was reported as
5698005M c/s...
...speaking of that, I enclose a patch that make John say 5698G c/s
instead (it's from fullMPI), is there any reason not to include this in
the Jumbo?
magnum
View attachment "john-1.7.6-jumbo-12-cpsfix.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (551 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
