JTR hash sorting #1154
Merged
JTR hash sorting #1154
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
m-1-k-3
requested changes
May 22, 2024
| print_output "[*] Found password data ${ORANGE}${HASH}${NC} for further processing in ${ORANGE}${HASH_SOURCE}${NC}" | ||
| echo "${HASH}" >> "${LOG_PATH_MODULE}"/jtr_hashes.txt | ||
| fi | ||
| if echo "${HASH}" | grep -qE '\$.*\$.*'; then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please check if we can solve this with =~
m-1-k-3
approved these changes
May 23, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
JTR should prioritize hashes with certain patterns
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
STACS module garbage handicaps jtr
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)? If possible add a screenshot.
linux hashes to the top
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
nope