I tested this prog with
- Win XP Pro @ Pentium 4/2,8 GHz, 2 GB RAM
- Win 7 64 Bit @ Core i7 U620 (mobile version), 4 GB RAM

Installation and activation on both systems without problems (Win 7: "Install as admin" for Setup.exe and Activate.exe!).

The speed of KRyLack Archive Password Recovery on both systems is horrible slow – compared with Elcom Soft Advanced Archive Password Recovery (very old version 4.50):

I made a 150 MB RAR with a 4 digit password (1234) and told both programs to try passwords from 0000 to 9999.

Results @ Pentium 4:

Elcom Soft Advanced Archive Password Recovery: 18 pws/min
KRyLack Archive Password Recovery: Less than 1 password/minute

Elcom Soft Advanced Archive Password Recovery got the password in 1 min + 8 secs.
KRyLack Archive Password Recovery got the pw after 44 minutes.

With the laptop with Core i7 KRyLack got the pw after 45 minutes.
The Core i7 U620 has 2 real cores = 4 virtual cores. The CPU Usage at the Core i7 was about 26 % (average), even the priority setting in CRyLack was "High". The CPU Usage at the Pentium 4 was about 75 % (priority setting "Medium").

Remember, the password was just 1234 and I told both programs to search for a password between 0000 and 9999. Now try to imagine how long KRylack needs to recover a password with unknown length, including Latin, caps, digits and symbols. Forget about it!

Sorry for my shitty little English and sorry to you KRyLack guys, your program is useless! Try to learn from Elcomsoft!

Ebola  –  13 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+104)

Перевести

After installation and activation, a somewhat gaudy interface was presented.
To test, a zip file password protected by PK ZIP v2.0, the old standard, was handled with ease, running at over 4000 password per second, but surprisingly not taking full advantage of the CPU’s quad core capabilities.
When presented with a zip file protected using AES it informed me it could not handle it!

About 10 years ago, a zip file protected by a long password contained information I needed to extract. The program I was attempting to crack it with, was considered to be a particularly good one, it informed me that it could take up to 4000 years to crack. I cracked it, but I’m no Alan Turing, I did it using a “Known-plaintext Attack” and I cannot see that this method is available in this program, a zip files greatest vulnerability!

In testing an rar file it ran at about 18 password per second, both this and the zip file would tested using brute force.

It always amuses me when people say how weak the protection is in these types of files, they've obviously never tried to crack one that has a decent length of password!
If your government lets you, and you really need to be secure try PGP, now that’s secure.
Possibly this program would be some use if you have a collection of old protected zip files or rar files but other than that it doesn't seem to offer too much for the price.

OldScotty  –  13 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+68)

Перевести

No CUDA support. That makes this 10 times slower than cRARk. Seriously, GPU-password cracking is a must. Password cracking is the place where parallel processing works wonders.

Fum  –  13 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+30)

Перевести

I downloaded a small RAR file the other day and forgot to check whether or not it was encrypted. Unfortunately, it was.

WOW I thought, seeing today’s offering, downloaded it, and using my Windows 7, quad core, 6 Gig of RAM computer, setting priority to ‘high’, waited for the password.

The RAR file was less than 7 kb in size, and now over 2 hours later, I am still waiting…..? Also worried that I didn’t include ‘symbols’ in my choices, so not looking good. Will update if it works, but definitely SLOW!

Keith Alston  –  13 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+27)

Перевести

mike #10
It is hard to imagine the huge numbers involved until you do the maths; using the simple formula
n!/r!(n-r)!, where n is the number of characters in our password and r is the number of printable characters at our disposal. For a 12 character password using all 96 printable characters, we can produce more than 6*10^14 passwords. If my sums are correct, at 40,000 passwords per second it would take just short of 500 years!
When you refer to credit cards all that is required is the pin number, a four character pin number using 40,000 passwords per second should be cracked in approximately 15 seconds, just showing why the password length is so important.
I must admit these figures surprised even me; it has been more than 50 years since I studied most of my mathematics, so I have checked and double checked my calculations and I can't find any fault, just hope to God it's not senility!
Just to clarify matters a ”Known-plaintext Attack” is one where you know the contents of a protected file. For instance, if someone had protected a text file say, containing a well-known nursery rhyme and we knew it, then it would only take seconds to find the password.
Let me end by saying how much I enjoy your comments and courteous way you present them.

OldScotty  –  13 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+24)

Перевести