My experience with the online ones is that I haven't really seen any that
implement salts. I haven't looked in some time thought so maybe now they
exist.


On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Robert Portvliet <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Assuming the attacker retrieves the hashes ...at what password
> length\strength do rainbow tables become impractical due to size & time to
> generate?
>
> Also, at what length\strength do the online rainbow table cracking services
> become ineffective?
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Craig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
>> Caveats: NONE
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> Craig L. Bowser
>> CISSP           SANS GSEC (Gold)
>> -------------------------------
>> Hard work spotlights the character of people; some turn up their sleeves,
>> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all!
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan
>> Stadelman
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 1:46 PM
>> To: PaulDotCom Security Weekly Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [Pauldotcom] Cracking good times
>>
>> The equations should say:
>>
>> > 20^72 * time to *try* one password == a lot of time
>>
>> but I am sure you get the idea ;)
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Dan Stadelman<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > It is really hard to answer this one because it really "all depends"
>> > on a lot of things - mainly how long it would take to test one
>> > password.  This can vary with system set up - if the user has access
>> > to the password hashes, etc.
>> >
>> > If you are trying to make up some stats you could do something like
>> > this (I assume you know this):
>> >
>> > 26 + 26 + 10 + 10 = 72 characters
>> >
>> > arranged 20 ways
>> >
>> > 20^72 * time to crack one password == a lot of time
>> >
>> > arranged 15 ways
>> >
>> > 15^72 * time to crack one password == a bit less time
>> >
>> > This is assuming there isn't some short cut to figuring out the
>> > password - like it is on a sticky note on someones monitor (which
>> > probably will happen if you are having such long passwords that are
>> > changing frequently).
>> >
>> > Laters,
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 9:39 AM, craig bowser<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone know a good reference for listing password cracking
>> >> times?  I'm trying to find some stats to determine if we should pick
>> >> a 20+ character password for service accounts and only change every 6
>> >> or 12 months or pick a shorter password length (10-12 characters) and
>> change every 90 days or so.
>> >> All passwords would be using all four character sets (Aa1!).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Craig L. Bowser
>> >>
>> >> CISSP       SANS GSEC (Gold)
>> >>
>> >> -------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Nothing makes a person more productive than the last minute. -
>> >> Contributed by Jeff Pappas
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> >> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>> >>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>> Classification:  UNCLASSIFIED
>> Caveats: NONE
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pauldotcom mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
>> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pauldotcom mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
> Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
>
_______________________________________________
Pauldotcom mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom
Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com

Reply via email to