Free Rainbow Tables | Forum

Home of the Distributed Generator and Cracker
It is currently 16 Apr 2014, 06:13

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

What Algorithm would you like to do next?
MD5 38%  38%  [ 41 ]
NTLM 30%  30%  [ 33 ]
SHA1 10%  10%  [ 11 ]
SHA265 / SHA512 5%  5%  [ 5 ]
MSCACHE 6%  6%  [ 7 ]
MYSQL SHA1 3%  3%  [ 3 ]
OTHER 8%  8%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 109
Author Message
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2010, 20:44 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Configuration made to fit a 32 GB usb stick (28 GB rainbow table set)
28GB = 28 * 10^9 bytes = 28 000 000 000 B

lm_all-space#1-7
keySpace = 7555858447479
numtables = 4

chainLen = 18500
bfpoint = 11037
expectedUniqueChains = 716500000
chainCount = 5296009750
totalExpUch = 2866000000
=> RTIv1 size = 28000903044 = 28 GB 903 KB 44 B

perfectTableSuccessRate = 0.826986244982550557784888 = 82.698 %
tableSetSuccessRate = 0.99910397004667197447903052 = 99.910 %

lm_all-space#1-7_0_18500x716500000
lm_all-space#1-7_1_18500x716500000
lm_all-space#1-7_2_18500x716500000
lm_all-space#1-7_3_18500x716500000
//716,500,000
//716.5 million chains per table
this set is 8.5 faster than the 12 GiB set.
Attachment:
28 GB stick.txt [744 Bytes]
Downloaded 309 times


-----------------------------

Configuration made to fit 32 GiB usb stick. ( 32 * 2^30 bytes ), (rainbow table size = 28 GiB)

28 GiB = 28 * 2^30 Bytes = 30064771072 B
keySpace = 7555858447479
chainLen = 17000
bfpont = 13071
expectedUniqueChains = 781000000
totalExpectedUniqueChains = 3124000000
RTIv1 size = 30064903044 = 28 GiB 128 KiB 900 B

perfectTableSuccessRate = 0.827484877112891019174471 = 82.748 %
tableSetSuccessRate = 0.99911425504482070087697083 = 99.911 %

lm_all-space#1-7_0_17000x781000000
lm_all-space#1-7_1_17000x781000000
lm_all-space#1-7_2_17000x781000000
lm_all-space#1-7_3_17000x781000000
//781 million perfect chains per table
10 times faster than the 12 GiB rainbow table set
~1.2 times faster than the 28 GB rainbow table set
Attachment:
28 GiB stick.txt [673 Bytes]
Downloaded 281 times


Sc00bz, please read the posts from page 9 !

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 03:44 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2010, 03:44 
Offline
MΩth √G∑∏∫∪≤

Joined: 03 Dec 2007, 11:37
Posts: 1059
_haxxor_ wrote:
scoobz, could you create a " bigger " spreadsheet for this ?

could you include more digits ? like 12 or more ? and up to 100 tables/set. i'm very interested. (it may sound useless to know that many digits, but please)

btw could you extend it to 99.99% ? and down to 96.8 % ? thx !

Sure it will take awhile as I did the last one by guess and check about a minute per table set. So I think I'll just write a program to do all of this which I meant to finish, but the UI took so long to get it nice (I remade it like 50 billion times) that I lost interest as it was just easier for me to use guess and check in excel. Give me like "two weeks" since I'm working on this one thing right now. 12 digits is pointless as the last few will be random because of inaccuracies. Even if I had a way to calculate the numbers to that accuracy it will be pointless as these are just estimates. Real world cases are off due to hashing algorithms not being evenly distributed... but I'll do it anyway :).

_haxxor_ wrote:
wild idea : let's create a 3 table set, with the maximum success rate : 99.75202349% (1 in 403)

what would be the tableWorkFactor, Sc00bz ? why did you wrote there N/A ???
Code:
         |           |           | Less      | Smaller Than | Smaller Than |
         |           |           | Total     | Previous     | Previous     |
         | Work Per  | Total     | Work Than | (Const Chain | (Const Total | Total Success
Tables   | Table     | Work      | Previous  | Length)      | Pre-work)    | Rate
---------+-----------+-----------+-----------+--------------+--------------+-----------------
3 Tables |       N/A |       N/A |           |              |              | 99.75202349% Max


(for lm_all-space#1-7)
LE: if you can't calculate the workfactor for 99.75202349 (1:403), then what is it for (1 in 256) 99.609375 % ? or smth in between.

i'm asking this, because i think we could fit lm_all-space#1-7 in 4-6 GiB, given the big tableWorkFactor. (the current table set is over 44 GiB)

The table work factor for the theoretical max success rate is the chain length. This means that you have key space start points. I wouldn't go much higher then a table work factor of like "100."

Code:
Table work |     Miss rate     |     Miss rate     |     Miss rate     |     Miss rate
  factor   |      1 Table      |      2 Tables     |      3 Tables     |      4 Tables
-----------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------
     10.0x |     Miss 1 in 5.3 |    Miss 1 in 28.0 |   Miss 1 in 148.5 | Miss 1 in   786.4
     20.0x |     Miss 1 in 6.2 |    Miss 1 in 38.0 |   Miss 1 in 234.0 | Miss 1 in 1,441.6
  24.3500x |     Miss 1 in 6.3 |    Miss 1 in 40.3 | Miss 1 in 255.9998| Miss 1 in 1,625.5
  24.3501x |     Miss 1 in 6.3 |    Miss 1 in 40.3 | Miss 1 in 256.0002| Miss 1 in 1,625.5
     30.0x |     Miss 1 in 6.5 |    Miss 1 in 42.5 |   Miss 1 in 277.4 | Miss 1 in 1,809.4
     40.0x |     Miss 1 in 6.7 |    Miss 1 in 45.1 |   Miss 1 in 303.3 | Miss 1 in 2,038.1
     50.0x |     Miss 1 in 6.8 |    Miss 1 in 46.8 |   Miss 1 in 320.5 | Miss 1 in 2,192.9
     60.0x |     Miss 1 in 6.9 |    Miss 1 in 48.0 |   Miss 1 in 332.6 | Miss 1 in 2,304.4
     70.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.0 |    Miss 1 in 48.9 |   Miss 1 in 341.7 | Miss 1 in 2,388.4
     80.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.0 |    Miss 1 in 49.5 |   Miss 1 in 348.7 | Miss 1 in 2,454.0
     90.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.1 |    Miss 1 in 50.1 |   Miss 1 in 354.2 | Miss 1 in 2,506.5
    100.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.1 |    Miss 1 in 50.5 |   Miss 1 in 358.8 | Miss 1 in 2,549.5
    110.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.1 |    Miss 1 in 50.8 |   Miss 1 in 362.6 | Miss 1 in 2,585.4
    120.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 51.1 |   Miss 1 in 365.8 | Miss 1 in 2,615.8
    130.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 51.4 |   Miss 1 in 368.5 | Miss 1 in 2,641.9
    140.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 51.6 |   Miss 1 in 370.9 | Miss 1 in 2,664.5
    150.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 51.8 |   Miss 1 in 372.9 | Miss 1 in 2,684.3
    160.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 52.0 |   Miss 1 in 374.7 | Miss 1 in 2,701.7
    170.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 52.1 |   Miss 1 in 376.4 | Miss 1 in 2,717.3
    180.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 52.3 |   Miss 1 in 377.8 | Miss 1 in 2,731.1
    190.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 52.4 |   Miss 1 in 379.1 | Miss 1 in 2,743.6
    200.0x |     Miss 1 in 7.2 |    Miss 1 in 52.5 |   Miss 1 in 380.3 | Miss 1 in 2,754.9

Difference between 100.0x and 200.0x is that 200.0x will find one more password for every 6,355.0 passwords.
100.0x miss 1 in 320.5, 99.72129%, passwords found per 6,355.0 passwords 6,337.3
200.0x miss 1 in 380.3, 99.73702%, passwords found per 6,355.0 passwords 6,338.3

_haxxor_ wrote:
Sc00bz, please read the posts from page 9 !

Which one?

_________________
http://www.tobtu.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2010, 03:51 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
you did that, thx.

about the application, you really don't need to get every thing perfect. just post a near perfect variant :P
it would be great. thx for the reply !

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2010, 10:45 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: 11 Oct 2007, 21:17
Posts: 1618
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
_haxxor_ wrote:
you did that, thx.

about the application, you really don't need to get every thing perfect. just post a near perfect variant :P
it would be great. thx for the reply !


We need perfect applications to calculate perfect rainbow tables 8-)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2010, 11:30 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
PowerBlade wrote:
_haxxor_ wrote:
you did that, thx.

about the application, you really don't need to get every thing perfect. just post a near perfect variant :P
it would be great. thx for the reply !


We need perfect applications to calculate perfect rainbow tables 8-)

i was talking more about the UI :P

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2010, 14:39 
Offline
Dictionary

Joined: 01 Sep 2008, 22:43
Posts: 82
_haxxor_ wrote:
4th post :lol:

@Schnitzelwecken 32 GB stick is smth very convenient.
i'll try to fit all-space on 12 GiB (16 GiB stick), and on 28 GiB (32 GiB stick)


Yes, I agree - but they're -at least at the moment- a bit expensive. It would just be nice to have something to show how RTs/rcracki_mt works which people can just keep. On the other hand, having lm_all on a stick certainly comes in handy ...

However, I'll just check today what the actual performance of reading tables from a BT4-stick is - there should be two fast sticks lying around somewhere ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jan 2010, 20:11 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Next RT set

mysqlsha1_loweralpha-space#1-9

here

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jan 2010, 21:49 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: 11 Oct 2007, 21:17
Posts: 1618
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Seems like the halflmchall set was lost in the disk crash. What about doing that set again?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jan 2010, 22:12 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
PowerBlade wrote:
Seems like the halflmchall set was lost in the disk crash. What about doing that set again?

why not. do you have the configs ?

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2010, 19:07 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: 11 Oct 2007, 21:17
Posts: 1618
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Nope, i dont. Could you do some?
Also i thought about doing loweralpha 1-10. How does that sound? We could start with a md5 version (isn't it quite some time ago since we last did a md5 set?). Could you do a config for this too?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2010, 20:12 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
loweralpha-space#1-10

see here : viewtopic.php?p=13768#p13768

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2010, 20:47 
Offline
Dictionary

Joined: 05 Jul 2009, 08:21
Posts: 92
Decide fast, computing my last two WUs :o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Jan 2010, 20:51 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
LordAlien wrote:
Decide fast, computing my last two WUs :o

viewtopic.php?p=13797#p13797

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 25 Jan 2010, 19:59 
Offline
Perfect Table

Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 15:10
Posts: 927
Location: Bucharest, Romania
PowerBlade, shouldn't we do smaller table sets, before we go for md5 loweralpha 1-10 ?

_________________
a2480f25 blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Jan 2010, 09:53 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: 11 Oct 2007, 21:17
Posts: 1618
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
_haxxor_ wrote:
PowerBlade, shouldn't we do smaller table sets, before we go for md5 loweralpha 1-10 ?


I think it's a long time ago since we did some md5, so lets do that next. I know a lot of people want md5 sets. (look at the poll!)
Then we can go back to some smaller sets afterwards


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group