[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161109211249.GA2879@openwall.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 22:12:49 +0100
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: alter default rules or filter, best way to focus on proper candidates?
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 02:50:33PM +0100, p+password@...atpro.net wrote:
> If I understand correctly, "./john --wordlist=spanish.dic --rules=jumbo" will not create candidates as fast as it could consume them against Raw-SHA1.
It might or it might not, but your tests don't show either way because
they may very well be bottlenecked by "--stdout", even when you're
directing output to /dev/null. You should test performance with an
instance of your target hash type, not with "--stdout". Computing a raw
SHA-1 hash is possibly quicker (on average, amortized with SIMD) than
outputting a candidate password to a pipe.
> So I probably should not bother filtering or limit length, even if I know that without any filter 4 candidates out of 5 are a waste of CPU cycles.
With fast hashes like this, yes, filtering is usually not worthwhile.
Alexander
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.
