3 ms·

And how does it do on hashes that are not known to be useless, eg bcrypt or argon2?

• bredren 7y ago
  It is running on top of hashcat, and at the above-mentioned compute it was benchmarking 45 million bcrypts per second. At that point it is more about the attack plan than the compute. https://imgur.com/a/DXQMsM1 https://imgur.com/a/DXQMsM1 edit: here is the demo video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnD4f8N1_OE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnD4f8N1_OE
  • lucb1e 7y ago
    "X bcrypts per second" is completely meaningless. What was the bcrypt setting? With the right setting, it would not be more than 1 bcrypt per century, or with the wrong setting, an almost equivalent rate to md5. It depends. More meaningful would be the speedup compared to a single CPU core, which is what the developers (should) benchmark against. They should make it as slow as possible, so if their system can do bcrypt with a cost of 15 in 0.1 seconds, they should set either that or cost 16. (Much more than 0.2s might be annoying to users or be a DOS vector.)
    • lazyjones 7y ago
      > With the right setting, it would not be more than 1 bcrypt per century You can't really call that a "right" setting when it takes at least as long to log in...
      • lucb1e 7y ago
        Right was meant as necessary to achieve that effect (sorry, English is not my native language). Obviously this is not a recommendation but just to point out that its configuration ranges from negligible to (on today's computers) forever.
        • umanwizard 7y ago
          English is my native language, and I think the way you used "right" was fine. At any rate, I understood what you meant.