[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACxgy5zak=HCOiNhtEZJdf7gJG+fRD+XUj3sR=GsO6b-n-2xyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 11:51:15 -0500
From: Powen Cheng <madtomic@...il.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: GekkoScience NEWPAC (Dual BM1387) USB Stickminer
(New 2PAC)
I understand better now and thank you for your insights.
“deliberately designs a new
password hashing scheme around Bitcoin mining“
Looks like something that is possible if pair with the right talents. I
guess one could always design ASIC or use FPGA.
On this note, any FPGA that is currently useable with john? I look briefly
and I wasn’t able to determine which is better GPU or FPGA.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:21 AM Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 09:42:55AM -0500, Powen Cheng wrote:
> > Even not through the use of open source of cgminer?
>
> No.
>
> > I would think solving
> > SHA256 hashes on this miner would be the same as solving hashes on JTR?
>
> It isn't.
>
> Bitcoin miners compute double-SHA-256 (not SHA-256) of block headers
> (not passwords), in which they adjust the nonce field, and then compare
> the result for being not greater than target (not for being equal to a
> target hash). This is a sufficiently different task from what we have
> in password cracking to make Bitcoin mining ASICs non-reusable.
>
> The only exception here is if someone deliberately designs a new
> password hashing scheme around Bitcoin mining, specifically to reuse
> those ex-miners for defensive password hashing. Then the ex-miners
> would also be usable offensively. But to my knowledge, no one does that
> defensively, so there's also nothing to attack in this way.
>
> 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.
