full-disclosure - Re: Patator - new multi-purpose brute-forcing tool

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F464AA2.5000409@thc.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:18:10 +0100
From: van Hauser <vh@....org>
To: Grandma Eubanks <tborland1@...il.com>, lanjelot@...il.com
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Patator - new multi-purpose brute-forcing tool

Hi folks,

as the programmer of hydra, some comments on this ...

On 23.02.2012 06:52, Grandma Eubanks wrote:
> Multiprocessing is quiet a bit faster than utilizing threads (this
> should be obvious as threads are GIL locked, while multi-processing can
> be spread amongst cores with the kernel's scheduler).

yes, multiprocessing is faster than threads, and threads used
intelligently are faster than forking - but ... for network login
hacking that is not the bottleneck and its not where optimization helps
anything.

the secret of being fast is how you balance the connections to the
network services and skipping parts of the protocols which are not
essential.

thats why hydra is the fastest one out there (own biased testing ;-)
http://thc.org/thc-hydra/network_password_cracker_comparison.html )
although it uses forking. go figure.
hydra got more stable and faster when I rewrote the balancing engine in
v7, the v7.2 is now the fastest and is very stable.

(why forking? because when it was written the goal was to be able to run
on any platform, even on esoteric platforms like ultrix 4, MVS
openedition etc. - and it did. In today's monocultures that a less
useful feature, I agree)

On Feb 22, 2012 6:43 AM, "lanjelot" <lanjelot@...il.com> wrote:
> To put it bluntly, I just got tired of using Medusa, Hydra, ncrack,
> metasploit auxiliary modules, nmap NSE scripts and the like because:
>  - they either do not work or are not reliable (got me false
>    negatives several times in the past)
>  - they are slow (not multi-threaded or not testing multiple or
>    not testing multiple passwords within the same TCP connection)

have you read the code of the named tools?
hydra does multiple password attempts in the connection if the protocol
supports it - the competitors do so too I'd guess, medusa and ncrack use
threading or parallel socketing - and rgw false negatives/positives ...
you will have them too, because its always interpretation of results.

post some speed comparison and show that your tool is ruling :-)
competition makes the tools better.

Greets,
van Hauser

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/