6 ms·
Whitepixel v2 now brute forcing 33.1 billion password/sec
- ique 16y agoI suppose that means if someone managed to get their hands on a database with MD5 hashed password and we disregard the time it takes to query the harddrive for a match; it could (stupidly) brute-force it's way to any 5 character password consisting of a-Z, 0-9 and !"#€%&/()=?+ in about 0.06 seconds. Or a 6 character password just under a minute. That's pretty impressive.
- stcredzero 16y agoOverkill, considering a lot of people still use 'password'.
- retube 16y agobtw, the url you list in your profile appears to be blocked by openDNS, reckons it's a phishing site.
- stcredzero 16y agoIt's an email redirection service I've been using since 1994.
- dedward 16y agoThen again, anyone who works on md5 password "cracking" for a living would likely already have the set of all 5 character printed passwords hashed and sitting in a database ready for recall with no need to speedily crank through them.
- nomis80 16y agoTo understand why your comment does not make sense, please read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_%28cryptography%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_%28cryptography%29
- kondro 16y agoThis is very impressive. Think of all the BitCoins they could create with a setup like that (I get an average of 50 coins every 26 minutes with http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculator.php http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculator.php). At a current market value of about USD$0.22 per coin, this equates to about USD$25/hour. Of course, BitCoin uses SHA256, but how much different from MD5 can that be?
- iheartmemcache 16y ago> How much different from MD5 can that be? Answer: Very. (MD5: 128 bit | SHA256: 256 bit) :: (2^256/2^128 = 2^128) => 3.40282367*10^38 of a larger keyspace. I know nothing about the specifical implementation details of either hashing method (and I eagerly await tptacek to offer a far more comprehensive response) but I'm sure the difference in keyspace alone is enough to make this practically impossible.
- Tichy 16y agoHm, there is a market value for bitcoins? 25$/hour sounds like a very good deal - as long as power consumption is less, it is a license to print money? Maybe this is the final incentive for me to look into EC2...
- mrb 16y agoEC2 is NOT cost-effective at all for hash computations as I describe in detail in: http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=42 http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=42 (This is the machine I built to develop whitepixel).
- dedward 16y agoI'm not a bitcoins expert - but wouldn't any jump in the availability of bitcoins necessarily cause deflation, as with any currency? If someone finds a way to generate,say, 5x more bitcoins that what the average expected amount is - they have a temporary advantage, but once those coins hit the market, the market is diluted and will quickly catch up. Bitcoins has replaced mining gold with generating bitcoins - so it will be harnessing server infrastructure and good code / math -vs- digging big holes in the ground.
- binarymax 16y agoWhat is the minimum safest length when using MD5? I remember seeing 14 somewhere but I cant find the citation. Not forcing everyone to use 14 chars of course but adding salt.
- rmc 16y agoDon't use MD5. This only gets faster, not slower. No matter how much you salt your passwords, soon they will be able to crack your passwords fast enough. And soon there will be rainbow tables of salts.
- Aleul 16y agoWhat would you recommend doing then? (New to this stuff)
- rmc 16y agoI suspect tptacek will come in with some sound advise. But bcrypt seems to be the way forward. cf. http://codahale.com/how-to-safely-store-a-password/ http://codahale.com/how-to-safely-store-a-password/
- sparky 16y agobcrypt or scrypt (http://www.tarsnap.com/scrypt.html http://www.tarsnap.com/scrypt.html). bcrypt lets you more or less arbitrarily set the computational complexity (in terms of instructions) of key generation. scrypt is newer (2009), but has the attractive property that it lets you arbitrarily set the memory complexity instead (how much memory it takes). This is attractive because key generation with a large memory requirement is more expensive to massively parallelize with an ASIC/FPGA farm. If you have a seriously good reason for not using either of these, which you probably don't, "stretched" (iterated thousands of times) and salted SHA-2 or MD5, or PBKDF2 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBKDF2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBKDF2 ) can be acceptable alternatives.
- 16y ago
- Tichy 16y agoPasswords and MD5?
- mrb 16y agoMicrosoft is worse: passwords and MD4. (Windows' newest password hashing algorithm, NTLM, is just a plain MD4 hash of the password. I estimate my 4x5970 machine can crack NTLM hashes at a rate of about 45 billion per second.)
- tedunangst 16y agoCalling it Microsoft's newest algorithm is very misleading. Microsoft have themselves deprecated NTLM and recommend Kerberos. Technically, NTLM will always be the "newest" unless they invent something newer, but it doesn't mean you need to use it.
- mrb 16y agoAnd Microsoft's Kerberos implementation (AD) hashes passwords on the domain controller using... NTLM! How am I misleading?
- dedward 16y agoLet's stop calling it brute-forcing - it's really not - or at least not calling it decrypting.
- endtime 16y agoHere are the usage instructions...sure sounds like brute force to me. Perhaps you could explain why it isn't? Usage: ./whitepixel [OPTION]... [<hash>] Main arguments: -c <charset> Generate candidate passwords using the specified charset which can be: lower Lowercase upper Uppercase digit Digits print Printable ASCII characters and space [0x20-0x7e] all All bytes [0x00-0xff] (default: lower) -l <length> Attack passwords of this length (default 5) <hash> MD5 hash to attack (default 00...00)