12 ms·
Password Cracking with 8x Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti GPUs
- walrus01 9y agoas with most really high electrical loads, if you can operate it remotely, do so. There's places in North America near major hydroelectric dams with electricity that costs $0.03 to $0.045 per kWh. Running something like this and the cooling needed for a 3kW thermal load on California electrical prices is a good way to burn money.
- jjordan 9y agoSomeone password cracking with 8 GTX 1080's isn't likely worried about the electricity costs associated with said cracking.
- monochromatic 9y agoIt was mentioned in the article though.
- walrus01 9y agotrue, but people use similar hardware configurations for all sorts of things. On a larger scale if you have ten systems each of which draws 3.2kW as measured from a watt meter on the AC side of their power supplies, you want to consider the operating costs as a significant part of the budget.
- PeterisP 9y agoIf you anticipate a full load and include cooling, already within a single year the electricity costs more than the GPU hardware - so yes, even (and especially!) if you're buying top end gear then electricity costs matter, it's more expensive than the shiny stuff.
- tgtweak 9y agoQuebec and Manitoba have rates as low as 0.03$CAD/kWh (~0.023 $USD), or about 0.07$USD/hr for this gpgpu system. Servethehome is including colocation rental costs (which also means colocation power cost, typically 3x utility markup) in their cost-per-hour estimate here.
- walrus01 9y agoquebec hydro is a huge reason for the location of the OVH datacenter there. margins are thin in the massive bulk hosting/colo/dedicated server business. http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2013/01/17/ovhs-big-green-hydro-powered-facility-in-quebec-opens/ http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2013/01/17/ovhs-...
- hughes 9y ago99% of the electricity in Quebec is from hydroelectric dams. This is how the costs are kept so low, and you don't really have to worry about resulting greenhouse gas emissions.
- astrodust 9y agoSemi-sorta. It did involve flooding huge amounts of Quebec, so there are consequences and greenhouse gas emissions due to rotting trees, but it's a different sort of equation.
- ihartley 9y agoDepending on when the land was flooded, some areas may me good candidates for underwater logging now or in the future. Apparently in some places this is a great source of wood for high quality musical instruments because there aren't many old hardwood trees available anymore. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_logging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_logging
- Elv13 9y ago
- manav 9y agoI have some 4u servers and I found that with 4x in a rack that's already to dense and the temperatures too high with the consumer level cards that need active cooling. On the other hand, in CA more rack space was relatively cheap.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoPeople tend to forget about "the flyover states," but here in Chicago we get ~55% of our power (that was back in 2011 [0]) from renewable and nuclear sources, and have access to similar pricing as a result. [0]: http://chicagoloopster.medill.northwestern.edu/2012/01/27/sources-of-our-power/index.html http://chicagoloopster.medill.northwestern.edu/2012/01/27/so...
- DanCarvajal 9y agoCan this brute force a smart fridge?
- jrodthree24 9y agoProbably, but Jian Yang won't be happy.
- ryan-allen 9y agoDid you forget the passcode to your beer?
- tqkxzugoaupvwqr 9y agoIt it a reference to the TV series Silicon Valley (season 4).
- gwaefawfewaef 9y agoWhich Video card works best for Deep Learning computation? www.surveyking.com/w/4wqkchh
- voycey 9y agoInteresting to see real world figures for bcrypt, also interesting that 7Zip's hashing algorithm seems extremely resilient (I assume it works on the same kind of difficulty / work factor that bcrypt uses but with a higher factor)
- jszymborski 9y agohad the same reaction... RAR similarly has good numbers. Would love to see numbers for Argon2 :)
- jrimbault 9y agoSlightly tangential but: 7zip amazes me. It hasn't been regularly updated for years, and still comes out on top of most benchmarks. And yet I find that many, if not most, people on Windows use WinRAR. It's good software, easy to install, easy to use, and it doesn't nag the user with warnings about licensing. I don't quite understand how WinRAR got popular in the first place with that kind of competition.
- a_t48 9y agoI've never had file associations working with 7z on any machine. :/
- 0xcoffee 9y agoI think you have to run 7zip as admin when setting the associations.
- lightedman 9y ago7zip seems to love to lose file association or simply fails when I double-click a .rar or .7z file, saying file type not recognized (nevermind the fact I just made that very archive with 7Zip!)
- bmpafa 9y agoWhen I was first learning computers I'd assumed winrar and winzip were official programs simply because of their names--that is, that they owned the file format. If others make the same mistake, this might explain 7z's market disadvantage.
- dragontamer 9y ago> The GTX 1080 Ti is the go-to value card for deep learning at the moment. Ah, that explains a lot. I recall seeing that AMD cards are being used for most of the Bitcoin / Etherium stuff right now, so I thought it was odd to see team-green used in this case. IIRC, AMD cards have faster integer performance, but are slower in floating-point than the NVidia cards. Password-cracking is primarily integer-based however, soooooooo... But since they're actually building a Deep Learning Platform (and while waiting for other stuff... using it to quickly-test a password cracking solution), these benchmarks make sense. Plus, its an interesting datapoint in any case. I do wonder what the AMD-cards would do however. Whether it'd be more efficient, or faster... (or hell: maybe conventional knowledge right now is wrong and NVidia is faster)
- jrimbault 9y agoI think (not sure) that AMD is faster per $ not faster for mining specifically ? So it makes more sense when mining for bitcoin to buy the fastest per $ cards ?
- mciancia 9y agoYou need to count in the performance per Watt and nvidia is sometimes better when it comes to that. Anyway, with current bitcoin and ethereum price, good luck finding any high end nvidia or amd GPU - miners are buying everything
- lightedman 9y agoOriginally ATi (right in the middle of being acquired by AMD) was killing nVidia in the bitcoin mining arena. People were buying 5770s left and right for the crazy hashrate they were getting.
- jacquesm 9y agoThe major difference between AMD and Nvidia for mining/hashing and other integer algorithms is that if that algorithm contains a 32 bit 'ROR' (rotate right) then AMD will do that in one tick whereas on an Nvidia card you would need 3 ticks. That single low level detail meant that AMD destroyed Nvidia when it came to computing hashes quickly because the innermost loops of those algorithms contain a ROR. Since then the situation has changed, NVidia has improved their performance but bitcoin mining has moved to ASIC almost entirely and for other algorithms AMD still seems to come out ahead of Nvidia. For deep learning the situation is reversed, there it is almost entirely Nvidia, a major reason is that Nvidia put substantial effort in low level libraries that get the maximum out of their hardware for deep learing applications.
- cm2187 9y agobcrypt: 21kH/s scrypt: 750kH/s The author didn't mention the work factor so I don't know how comparable the results are. But I thought the merit of scrypt over bcrypt was that it was memory hard, i.e. hard to run on a GPU. It doesn't seem to be the case.
- mrb 9y agoThe thing about bcrypt is that despite using small data structures in memory (kilobytes) it reads and writes and rewrites a lot of data into them (megabytes, when choosing common work factors). And the small size of its data structures is still just a bit too big to fit many parallel instances of bcrypt in GPU L2 caches. So it is effectively "memory hard" on GPUs. Contrast this with scrypt which writes memory (typically megabytes) only once, and a byte is read, on average, only once. bcrypt and scrypt are both, at the moment, memory hard on GPU, but for different reasons. bcrypt reads/writes many times a small buffer. scrypt reads/writes once a large buffer. Don't pay too much importance on comparing the hash/sec of these 2 algorithms in this specific benchmark. The configurable work factors influence speed a lot. One day L2 caches will be big enough and we will see a sudden massive cracking speed improvement for bcrypt. This isn't going to happen anytime soon for scrypt.
- nly 9y agoSo one is memory capacity bound, and one is memory bandwidth bound.
- valarauca1 9y agoThe notion of scrypt being "memory hard" is from 2009. This is when GPU just started supporting 1GiB of RAM [1] 256MiB and 512MiB models were still common place. The 1080Ti supports 11x that [2] its a far cry to buy a GPU that doesn't support at least 4GiB. Scrypt difficult is 128 bytes × N_cost×r_blockSizeFactor [3]. The "standard" parameters 16384 = N blocksize = 8 results in 16MiB of memory per instance. On a 512MiB GPU that was only 32 instances in parallel. A modern 1080Ti (with 11GiB) that can be 704 instances. Now we're cooking with gas. Moore's Law it happens. [1] http://www.anandtech.com/show/2744/2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/2744/2 [2] https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=0&family=GeForce+10+Series+Family&chipset=GTX+1080+Ti https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=0&family... [3] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11126315/what-are-optimal-scrypt-work-factors https://stackoverflow.com/questions/11126315/what-are-optima...
- mrb 9y agoIn 2010 I built an 8-GPU machine[1] (4 dual-GPU AMD HD5970) and wrote an MD5 bruteforcer (then faster than hashcat), doing 28.6 then 33.1 billion passwd hashes/sec with a software optimization: http://blog.zorinaq.com/whitepixel-breaks-286-billion-passwordsec/ http://blog.zorinaq.com/whitepixel-breaks-286-billion-passwo... It's interesting to note that 6.5 years later a single GPU like the Nvidia 1080 Ti can match the whole 2010 machine (32 billion hashes/sec). This is a doubling of speed every ~2 years. Moore's Law is still alive and kicking (contrary to what many claim)! [1] Incidentally posting this machine on HN is how I got pointed to Bitcoin thanks to the reply of a HN user :) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2003888 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2003888
- vit05 9y ago"At a current market value of about USD$0.22 per coin" wow
- Roritharr 9y agoThe regret I feel having given away all of my 100 bitcoins at that price point will forever haunt me.
- pmontra 9y agoSeconded. The bitcoin to USD ratio is like 1 to 2700 right now http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=XBT&to=USD http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=XBT&to=USD
- ASlave2Gravity 9y agoWhat's caused the price to rise so much the past few months?
- bastijn 9y agoAccepting by major parties and even speculated governments (Japan I believe) was one. In generic, being able to spend it in more places as well as people seeing the potential of trading in it.
- Const-me 9y agoI’ve once used my PC for the same thing, the result was OK. Based on raw performance, my GTX 960 GPU is 4.5 times slower than a single 1080 Ti, and thus 36 times slower than 8x 1080 Ti’s. My GPU was able to try 20GB passwords in a couple of minutes. That was the largest password list I’ve found on the internets. However, neither system can brute force even a short 8 characters password. If the password is lower+upper+digits, that’s (26*2+10)^8=2.14E+14 passwords. This number is way out of range even for a PC with 8x 1080 Ti. Those GPUs are only useful in a very small number of corner cases.
- mrb 9y ago2.14e14 is nothing. 8x 1080 Ti can crack that in less than 15 minutes (NTLM, MD4, MD5).
- Const-me 9y agoThis page says 8x 1080 Ti can do 1.3e10 hashes/sec for NTLM: https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a270c40 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a27... To test 2.14e14 passwords, you need 4.5 hours. Add a single extra character to that password and the time will become too long regardless on your hardware.
- nitin_flanker 9y agoAlso, the OP didn't mention the use of symbols. Cracking even a 8 digit password that have symbols in it will become impractical to even consider.
- lightedman 9y agoProcess of elimination restricts character and symbol sets, generally, narrowing your set of possible combinations greatly. The best way to crack a password isn't to brute-force it first, it's to first analyze who made the password, and the password system, to narrow down all possibilities before you try brute-forcing. Example; if a person is American, you can pretty much assume they're restricted to the typical US keyboard and its symbols, for 90+% of the population. Very few people know of ALT codes or unicode or even the character map, even in IT. That narrows your symbol subset down dramatically. System for passwords truncates after 12 characters, has a minimum of 8? You already know you don't need to try doing anything with more than 12 characters, and you can limit your password cracking to starting with 8 characters and ignore anything with fewer than that. That eliminates a whole slew of brute-forcing that is required, as you've now narrowed down the password range. All it takes is a little thinking. Man can make it, man can break it, there is simply no exception.
- cleeus 9y agoAs a dev you should take a look at the difference of hashes/s of the different algorithms. Some are measured in GH/s, some in MH/s, some only kH/s. E.g. MD5 is way faster then SHA256. So if you only use a strong hash for ensuring data integrity in the absence of adversaries and performance matters, you may prefer MD5 even in these days.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoThere's no good reason to use md5, period. If performance matters and security doesn't, use something like mmhash3. If security matters and speed doesn't, use something like SHA-512 (optionally truncated to 256 bits). If both matter, use something like siphash if a prf will do or blake2 if you need a true, high-speed cryptographic hash. (Actually, besides portability and interoperability, there's probably no good reason to use SHA-anything over blake2. Although if you are working in environments that provide hardware crypto support (Intel SHA Extensions on Atom, now also supported on Ryzen so maybe we'll see it on the desktop, too), SHA becomes faster than blake2 and you should use that instead.) If at any point you find yourself in a situation where your hash being computed too fast poses a security risk, that should be a HUGE warning. Hashes should be fast, cryptographic or otherwise. If you need a "slow hash" you are probably looking for a derivation algorithm and not a hash and should be looking at scrypt, bcrypt, or even pbkdf2.
- cleeus 9y agoI have not looked deeply at mmhash3 (I guess it means murmurhash3), but wikipedia says: [...] When using 128-bits, the x86 and x64 versions do not produce the same values [...] which will make it unsuitable for cross-platform applications. I was talking about a usecase where you could also choose CRC32 from a security standpoint but want more collision resistance. How does blake2 performance compare to MD5?
- aappleby 9y agoThe wikipedia page might be a bit misleading - there's a 128-bit murmur3 that uses 32-bit math (works well on most every processor), and a 128-bit murmur3 that uses 64-bit math (much faster on 64-bit processors, much slower on 32-bit ones) -Austin, Murmur author.
- beefsack 9y agoWe all know MD5 is broken, but looking at it from purely a brute-force perspective: If you look at a US English keyboard, you've generally got 47 unique character keys. Let's double it and say there are 100 different characters you can type just using the character keys and shift. This machine could brute-force crack any 6 character password in under 4 seconds, any 7 character password in just over 6 minutes, and any 8 character password in just over 10 hours. And that's using the least efficient method known.
- ratacat 9y agoThat's assuming you're only dealing with cracking a hashed version, or you have unlimited instant opportunities to "get it right"
- beefsack 9y agoThat's correct, but the context of this discussion is cracking hashes locally. Note that using salts don't necessarily slow down brute-force cracking of a specific hash if the salt is known and understood.
- pfalke 9y agoAs a non-infosec guy, could someone shed more light on the implications for end users? I get that the combination of password reuse, short passwords and the fact that some services store passwords in plain text or as MD5 hashes makes it easy to break into accounts once a single service is compromised. So my takeaway is not to use longer passwords, but to use a password manager and have unique passwords for every service. My current setup is 8 character passwords for online services (easier to occasionally type in manually). Am I running a risk by not using 12 character passwords?
- ThomasGeek 9y agoPassword managers are good but long passwords and password managers are better. If we are assuming MD5 then yes an 8 character password is not secure if someone is targeting you as it would take 10 hours to crack. If someone has a entire database of users let's say 50,000 users all with 8 character passwords then that would take 57 years to crack every password, so you may or may not be in the unlucky few that are at the top of the list. Also as GPUs get more powerful that time is going to come further down and you will be more at risk. Personally I use longer than 12 character passwords with a password manager, the inconvenience of having to type it in manually once or twice is not really that much greater than an 8 or 12 character long password.
- hacked_news 9y agoThere exists a computerphile video about this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U-RbOKanYs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U-RbOKanYs
- Tepix 9y agoFor reference, here are some more numbers: 8x AMD R9 290X https://gist.github.com/epixoip/8171031 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/8171031 8x GTX 980 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/c0b92196a33b902ec5f3 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/c0b92196a33b902ec5f3 8x GTX 1080 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a270c40 https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a27...
- castratikron 9y agoI wonder what happens to all of the old cards that are replaced every generation? Would be nice to snag a couple of those off of eBay.
- AlphaSite 9y agoThey're there and unbelievably cheap. Just wait for the inevitable death of GPU mining again.
- castratikron 9y agoWould you happen to know the model name of yesterday's deep learning GPU?