2020. 2. 21. 14:58ㆍ카테고리 없음
Share this story.At the beginning of a sunny Monday morning earlier this month, I had never cracked a password. By the end of the day, I had cracked 8,000. Even though I knew password cracking was easy, I didn't know it was ridiculously easy—well, ridiculously easy once I overcame the urge to bash my laptop with a sledgehammer and finally figured out what I was doing.My journey into the Dark-ish Side began during a chat with our security editor, who remarked in an offhand fashion that cracking passwords was approaching entry-level 'script kiddie stuff.'
This got me thinking, because—though I understand password cracking conceptually—I can't hack my way out of the proverbial paper bag. I'm the very definition of a 'script kiddie,' someone who needs the simplified and automated tools created by others to mount attacks that he couldn't manage if left to his own devices. Sure, in a moment of poor decision-making in college, I once logged into port 25 of our school's unguarded e-mail server and faked a prank message to another student—but that was the extent of my black hat activities. If cracking passwords were truly a script kiddie activity, I was perfectly placed to test that assertion.It sounded like an interesting challenge. Could I, using only free tools and the resources of the Internet, successfully:.
Find a set of passwords to crack. Find a password cracker.
Find a set of high-quality wordlists and. Get them all running on commodity laptop hardware in order to. Successfully crack at least one password. In less than a day of work?I could.
And I walked away from the experiment with a visceral sense of password fragility. Watching your own password fall in less than a second is the sort of online security lesson everyone should learn at least once—and it provides a free education in how to build a better password. / Could an aging Dell laptop make me a 'hashkiller'?
The first hitI began with attack mode 0 ('straight'), which takes text entries from a wordlist file, hashes them, and tries to match them against the password hashes. This failed until I realized that Hashcat came with no built-in worldlist of any kind (John the Ripper does come with a default 4.1 million entry wordlist); nothing was going to happen unless I went out and found one.
Fortunately, I knew from reading Dan's that the biggest, baddest wordlist out there had come from a hacked gaming company called RockYou. In 2009, RockYou lost a list of 14.5 million unique passwords to hackers.As Dan put it in his piece, 'In the RockYou aftermath, everything changed. Gone were word lists compiled from Webster's and other dictionaries that were then modified in hopes of mimicking the words people actually used to access their e-mail and other online services.
In their place went a single collection of letters, numbers, and symbols—including everything from pet names to cartoon characters—that would seed future password attacks.' Forget speculation—RockYou gave us a list of actual passwords picked by actual people.Finding the RockYou file was the work of three minutes.
How To Crack A Tripcode Cracker Recipe
I pointed Hashcat to the file and let it rip against my 15,000 hashes. It ran—and cracked nothing at all.At this point, sick of trying to puzzle out best practices by myself, I looked online for examples of people putting Hashcat through its paces, and so ended up by Robert David Graham of Errata Security. In 2012, Graham was attempting to crack some of the 6.5 million hashes released as part of an infamous hack of social network LinkedIn, he was using Hashcat to do it, and he was documenting the entire process on his corporate blog. Bingo.He began by trying the same first step I had tried—running the complete RockYou password list against the 6.5 million hashes—so I knew I had been on the right track. As in my attempt, Graham's straightforward dictionary attack failed to produce many results, identifying only 93 passwords. Whoever had hacked LinkedIn, it appeared, had already run such common attacks against the collection of hashes and had removed those that were simple to find; everything that was left presumably would take more work to uncover.