What is faster brute-force or dictionary attack in hydra?

Tutorial and Hacking. All Tutorial and hacked are for educational purpose only.
User avatar
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:28 am

What is faster brute-force or dictionary attack in hydra?

Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:56 am

If you created a dictionary of all possible combinations of passwords, beginning with "111111" and ending with "zzzzzz" (assuming just uppercase letters, lowercase letters and digits), and you didn'tsort this dictionary by password likelihood, but kept it in lexicographic order, the question would become which was faster - feeding these dictionary strings into your password guesser or having the password guesser create the combinations on the fly.

To answer that question, we must know where we store our dictionary, which is large enough that we probably can't fit it entirely into memory, so we'll need to store it on a hard drive.

It's also important to know that hard drives (the magnetic, rotating disk variant, anyway) have access times in the millisecond range. RAM is orders of magnitude faster, but still slow compared to L1 cache, which again is much slower than direct register access in a CPU. Unfortunately, general purpose CPU registers can only store maybe 128 bytes in total, and L1 cache only stores a few kb in total.

Again assuming you were working with a computer that had 8 GB of memory set aside for you to use, you could keep about 1 billion dictionary entries in RAM at the same time. That's about 2% of the whole key space.

If you loaded your dictionary from the hard drive, you'd need to load a total of 325 gigabytes of data (in junks of maybe 4 GB each - you'd always load 4 GB of passwords while trying the passwords in the other 4 GB). Even with SSDs, that would take a while.

Now if you were dealing with a hash function like md4, hashcat would easily exhaust your candidate passwords before you could load the next batch, because on a modern GPU it can literally test billions of passwords each second. In practice, you can't load candidate passwords that fast from hard disk. On the other hand, if you were trying to attack passwords encrypted with a hash function like bcrypt, loading candidate passwords from hard drive wouldn't even make a dent in the time needed to successfully attack the password, because even modern GPUs can't bcrypt fast enough to exhaust 500 million candidates before the next 500 million can be loaded from hard drive.

Let's see if creating the passwords on the fly, instead of loading them into RAM in huge chunks, would be faster:
CPUs have some interesting properties. For example, they use instruction prefetch, branch prediction and tentative execution to execute code before it's actually known whether it should be executed or not. Together with the CPU cache, this means that if you run a very small, tight piece of code, such as code to enumerate all possible combinations of a given bit length, it can basically run entirely in the CPU, never touching (slow) RAM. Small passwords (6-8 bytes) easily fit in a single CPU register, 16-byte-passwords still fit in two registers. Code to produce the next password candidate from the last one is as simple as using an "add" instruction, which is one of the fastest CPU instructions there is. So I'm fairly confident that you could generate every password combination much faster than you could load the whole list of them from an external source.

But again, the time a CPU (or GPU) would need to calculate an actual bcrypt hash to compare against a hashed password would dwarf the time required to generate the candidate passwords.

So the method of password generation simply isn't that important for well-protected passwords. It only matters when dealing with weak or very fast hash functions such as md4, md5, sha1 etc.

If you assume every password is equally likely, then generating all the passwords one after the other (brute forcing) on the fly makes more sense, because you won't need to keep huge dictionaries on your hard drive. You can create them faster on the fly. This is why nobody keeps unsorted password dictionaries on their hard drives for stupid brute forcing.

On the other hand, if you admit that some passwords (think "123456" and "password" are more likey than others (think "1qHGmR"), then creating a dictionary of these passwords and loading that dictionary into RAM, and maybe using some rules to create derivatives such as "sarah1997" and "sarah1998" from the base dictionary entry "sarah", is the way to go, because it will pretty much always be much faster.

That said, if you're actually dealing with 6 letter passwords and a weak hash function, it won't matter much either way, because hashcat and compatriots can exhaust a 6 character keyspace by brute force in a matter of minutes, hours or days, depending on the hash function used and the power of the available GPU rig.


The quieter you become, the more you can hear...

Return to “KALI Linux”


In total there are 10 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 7 guests
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense
Most users ever online was 156 on Sun Jun 17, 2018 7:42 am
Total posts 460
Total topics 339
Total members 69
Our newest member svetikvow
No birthdays today