Slashdot Mirror
New Online MD5 Hash Database
Gravix writes with a shameless plug for his new site "Sporting over 12 million entries, project GDataOnline is one of the largest non-RainbowTable based MD5 crackers on the internet. The database spans over 7 languages, 35 topics, and contains common mutations to words that include numbers and capitalization. Average crack time for 5 hashes: .04 seconds. No more waiting weeks for your results!" Shameless plug aside, the site still seems worth a closer look.
Quick! everybody go test your password security by sending it to a random web site
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
6436a55a08760c5b94dbed4476f83fcd
Does anyone know how to get a hold of a database such as this? As part of our IT auditing I'd like to be able to do a join of our md5-encoded user passwords (no salts or anything) with this to see whose password is insecure... yeah, that's it...
RESULTS:
Hash Pass
4e9fd9f4624c02685096769364a81d95 slashdot
Yes, it does.
Nothing for you to see here, Please move along.
This is fun.. watching his hash counter go up. It was at 32 when I first saw it, which means that near all of the increase over the next few days can be attributed to the /. effect (assuming he doesn't get posted to some other major site).
Apart from the fact that this site is somewhat morally questionable, it doesn't seem to work very well. I inserted a number of hashes for common first names and dictionary words, and none of them returned a hit. If the database doesn't even cover common stuff such as this, what is it really good for? Really, 12 million hashes out of a space of 2^128 is truly miniscule.
Any system using plain md5 to hash passwords is broken anyway. Include a salt - and any database over hashes will become useless. Besides if people choose good passwords, they are most likely not in the database. That is already two reasons why people should be protected, do we need anymore?
For many other uses of cryptographic hashes the input is much more than a single word, and typically you don't really worry about keeping the input a secret anyway.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
thats why the made a form for you to add words. Crazy ain't it. Although they should've made some automatic leetspeak adding script.
What would be really nice is to see this grow past a simple MD5 database. If you're going to get traffic, you really should get an NTLM database up and start populating it as soon as possible.
A few other places have these, in differing amounts. Rainbowcrack has tons of them, but require you to submit some before being allowed to query the system. I did submit a few NTLM hash tables, but it took the better part of a week to get my query back (it's supposed to be a lot faster than that).
There's also Ophcrack which uses tables similar to rainbow tables. It has a web interface to query NTLM hashes for simple passwords.
With these pre-computed hash tables, basic password security is starting to take a hit and it's becoming more and more worthwhile to use a simple but long password rather than a short and complex one. If you're on Windows, it's also VERY worthwhile to read about forcing Windows to store only the NTLM hash and drop the LM hash. It breaks old compatibility with Win 9x but is very worth it if you don't need that. This helps against precomputed attackes but has an even bigger impact agains brute-force attacks.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Any modern Linux distribution worth its salt (pardon the pun) uses at least an MD5-based salted password storage system. Wikipedia will tell you more about salting. What it boils down to is that using enough bits of salt can make it infeasible for Joe Hacker to store a database of passwords, salts, and their hashed values that would encompass all combinations and allow dictionary attacks against MD5-protected passwords. If your Linux system doesn't use a salted hash to store passwords in /etc/shadow, you may have an issue if untrusted users have access to your system. Then again, if untrusted users have enough access to read /etc/shadow, you have a bigger problem than someone cracking your normal user passwords.
Sorry, my karma just ran over your dogma.
What advantages does this database have over say a Cray supercomputer, which I could also afford.
"I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google"
To call LM weak would be an understatement. LM takes passwords up to 14 charackets in length, fine you think until you realise that the way tey did it is to hash 2 7-character strings. This means for any password, you have to crack a max of 7 characters. Oh, and did I meantion it's case insensitive?
There are existing ranbowtables covering basically the entire LM space but, really, you don't need it. A fast dual core chip will crack it in less than a day.
The parent is correct in that in all cases you can you should set Windows to only use NTLM, or better yet NTLMv2. We are (finally) getting to do that at work as we purged the last NT and 98 systems from the domain.
Does not take up as much room, and someone else is responsible for the maintenance. It's too late for me, but you might benefit from my shortsightedness.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
It is not an attack, it is just a dictionary.
It works for any hash function.
They're just precomputing hashes, from what I can see. There's nothing that stops you from doing it for a very large number of inputs and storing the results. If you want to get a collision using that precomputation, however, it'll be a lot harder on SHA-1 than on MD-5, even given the new attacks on it. (If you're curious about the attacks, look at this years' CRYPTO papers. Professor Wong and her team have come out with some great stuff.) Preimage attacks will probably still be difficult on SHA-1, as the new results don't signifigantly impact the property of preimage-resistance (from what I saw of the attacks in the talks).
The upshot is: (1) yes, you can do this, it's just brute-force; (2) it's not as easy with MD-5.
Lea
Linux distros these days use MD5 by default -- but they use it in a way that's not so horribly stupid as to be broken by this attack.
/etc/shadow. A few lines of perl, /usr/share/dict and 30 seconds later and I had the root password, the same password as other more important machines. Naturally I mentioned this to the tutors (aftre some subtle brainfucking)
In an "intro to linux" course I had to take a while back as part of a general engineer course, I noticed that one of the test machines wasn't using
I suppose that this is useful if you come across a site so horribly broken as to not use a SALT [...]
In that case, you might try battery...
A friend of mine got his account terminated for a manoeuver like this -- he ran crack over an unshadowed /etc/passwd on one of the machines at his school and sent the output to the sysadmin:-)
More often then not people are dumb and easily scared. Every time you do something they don't expect you to do, they might treat you as a criminal, no matter what your intentions. If I'd come across someone else's root password, I'd think twice before telling them. That is, unless I wasn't their boss, or hired by their boss to do this.
BTW, I bet the root password you got was "god", "the plague", or something from the same wavelength:-).
MD5 hashes aren't unique. There are around 2^105 (around 10^32, or 10 decillion) 10 MB files with the hash '498b4ddc9f957eca6473923163dd117f', for example. There's also a five-letter word that coincidentally hashes to that value AND describes you, but you can find it yourself.
Actually I have seen many applications that fail to salt passwords before hashing them; it's depressing. Salt should be long enough to be globally unique when randomly generated. Old-style Unix passwords used a 12-bit salt, which was pathetic; 128 bits would be plenty.
In addition, it's best to iterate the hash many times, which slows down dictionary attacks. See Kelsey, Schneier et al, "Secure Applications of Low-Entropy Keys":
http://www.schneier.com/paper-low-entropy.html
The proofs in that paper are based on the assumption that the hash function is collision free, which of course MD5 isn't; another hash function might be preferable.
Xenu loves you!
Visiting this site (md5 one) resulted in pop-ups which were loaded with the StartPage Trojan which fortunately F-Secure spotted.
Interestingly, do a MD5 hash of 1
The result is c4ca4238a0b923820dcc509a6f75849b
Do a google search for that string.
That results in roughly 2000 hits. That's 2000 people running un-salted hashes...
The Mini Repository - more links
It's kind of strange how the moderation of a post can change its meaning. I was reading the parent post when it was modded "+5 interesting". I thought it was a crock, as everyone knows that since hashes have collisions, they cannot be used for lossless (or practical lossy) compression.
Anyway, I pressed Reload to see if there were any new posts, and stumbled upon the parent again, now moderated "+5 funny". My first thoughts were "what a subtle parody....wait a minute, this looks familiar".
THe best way to 'shame' the admins publicly, is to crack it on your pc or laptop at home, print out the passwords, and then covertly, where there are no cameras, or if its REAL REAL busy with your sly quick hand, pin the passwords to the main notice board, then watch 50 other idiots use it to really screw up the system.
The school would be real real dumb to expell or terminate 50 students accounts.
Or if your really brave, get some weed killer and write the password on the front lawn, and watch it magically appear over the weekend. Totally funny and covert. Admins would get the sack and they would be a school legend.
Usual passwords are either startrek or hitch hickers guide related.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
This is lightly salted.
"slashdot.org<my password>" will render any generic databases like GData useless for Slashdot password searching. It means someone has to build up a Slashdot specific database using a dictionary first. That is all a salt is really for, to inconvenience a dictionary attack.
"slashdot.orgbaadger<my password>" (<site><username><password>) would be better as it means the cracker has to build a database specific to slashdot and my username.
So yes these passwords are salted, using the domain just saves the plugin having to save random salts somewhere.
Your missing a trick.. you could reduce the file of MD5 hashes with MD5, write it down and carry 461 Gb on a postit note!
More often then not people are dumb and easily scared. Every time you do something they don't expect you to do, they might treat you as a criminal, no matter what your intentions.
This is why it's not a good idea to humiliate people who have more power than you if you have something to lose.
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
Booting the machine in Knoppix requires that the 'bad guy' have physical access to the machine. Even if physical access cannot be well restricted, you can turn-off 'boot from CDROM' in the bios, and password-protect the bios. Now the 'bad guy' has to open the machine, find the motherboard-type, find out which jumper clears the bios password(s), etc. Most machines can also be padlocked shut, so now the 'bad guy' needs to bring a Dremel or such.
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain