Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Airolib-ng VS. Aircrack-ng

  1. #1
    Good friend of the forums Eatme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socks5
    Posts
    308

    Post Airolib-ng VS. Aircrack-ng

    This forum doesn't have Poll option so im going to see if i can explain this in a formerly matter.

    This will be based on your hardware (CPU), (GPU-If you have one)

    I wanted to know what are yall thoughts, on this...

    What will be used..

    1 Million pwl
    Airolib-ng
    Airccrack-ng
    1 Essid
    ---
    The password to the essid will not be in the list. I'll tell you why later on..

    We already know using airolib-ng with aircrack-ng speeds up things really fast because airolib-ng scans the pwl ahead of time..but lets think about it.

    We will determine if we're wasting our time using Airolib-ng. Since Airolib-ng takes a while computing a list depending on size and hardware, if aircrack-ng runs that same pwl at the same time airolib-ng is computing the same pwl ??? hmm..who will finish 1st ?

    Lets say your Aircrack-ng runs 200-500.k/s (300-700 in my case). And you let it run that pwl all the way through without cracking anything, will it finish before Airolib-ng finishes computing ?

    I haven't tested this yet, since i dont have 2 computers...maybe someone already did, i would like to know some approximate results on this. Because if Aircrack-ng can finish a 1 million pwl faster then Airolib-ng is computing it, then really whats the point ?

    Yes Airolib-ng + Aircrack-ng is a big booster in speed but, by using Airolib-ng, you're basically running a pwl twice, airolib-ng just doesn't verify if the correct pw is in the list, it just scans the pwl, is what i call it.

    BUT! Airolib-ng does have a bigger pro and less cons vs aircrack-ng. Cuz Airolib-ng can save data and be used for a later time, and this will make aircrack-ng crack even faster if running into the same essid thats in the DB.

    -------
    EDIT:
    Quote Originally Posted by Snayler View Post
    I read it somewhere that with airolib you would only save about 5min.

    EDIT:

    It seems that it depends on your processor speed. Aircrack rates are constant, but airolib rates may vary from processor to processor.
    Airolib-ng and cowpatty
    Well I guess, that sums my thoughts up. We all know Airolib-ng is better to use imo. cuz it saves data for later use. I just wanted to see how far or how close they both finished in real time.

    I guess thats why Airolib-ng+Aircrack-ng method is your best bet to go with if you do a lot of WPA cracking.

    thanks for the info.

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Snayler View Post
    I tired it, and got this....0.o wtf happen

    Collected all necessary data to mount crack against WPA/PSK passphrase.
    Starting dictionary attack. Please be patient.
    key no. 10000: acetannin
    key no. 20000: anthobiology
    key no. 30000: bakemeats
    key no. 40000: bluegrass
    key no. 50000: carbon-dioxide snow
    key no. 60000: cloisterwise
    key no. 70000: cringle-crangle
    key no. 80000: Dicksonia
    key no. 90000: eliasite
    key no. 100000: february28th
    key no. 110000: galvanograph
    key no. 120000: gyirrrvj
    key no. 130000: house jobber
    key no. 140000: interpause
    key no. 150000: lachryma
    key no. 160000: malissia
    key no. 170000: monkeyboard
    key no. 180000: nonmicrobic
    key no. 190000: overnotable
    *** buffer overflow detected ***: ./cowpatty terminated
    ======= Backtrace: =========
    /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x48)[0xb7e976d8]
    /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6[0xb7e95800]
    /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__fread_chk+0x143)[0xb7e960f3]
    ./cowpatty[0x80490af]
    ./cowpatty[0x804a52b]
    ./cowpatty[0x804aa98]
    /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xe5)[0xb7db3685]
    ./cowpatty[0x8048d11]
    ======= Memory map: ========
    08048000-0804d000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 4458415 /pentest/wireless/cowpatty/cowpatty
    0804d000-0804e000 r--p 00004000 08:01 4458415 /pentest/wireless/cowpatty/cowpatty
    0804e000-0804f000 rw-p 00005000 08:01 4458415 /pentest/wireless/cowpatty/cowpatty
    09ab5000-09ad6000 rw-p 09ab5000 00:00 0 [heap]
    b7d82000-b7d83000 rw-p b7d82000 00:00 0
    b7d83000-b7d97000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 5065745 /usr/lib/libz.so.1.2.3.3
    b7d97000-b7d99000 rw-p 00013000 08:01 5065745 /usr/lib/libz.so.1.2.3.3
    b7d99000-b7d9b000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 6727145 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libdl-2.8.90.so
    b7d9b000-b7d9c000 r--p 00001000 08:01 6727145 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libdl-2.8.90.so
    b7d9c000-b7d9d000 rw-p 00002000 08:01 6727145 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libdl-2.8.90.so
    b7d9d000-b7ef5000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 6727139 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.8.90.so
    b7ef5000-b7ef7000 r--p 00158000 08:01 6727139 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.8.90.so
    b7ef7000-b7ef8000 rw-p 0015a000 08:01 6727139 /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc-2.8.90.so
    b7ef8000-b7efb000 rw-p b7ef8000 00:00 0
    b7efb000-b802e000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 5103735 /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libcrypto.so.0.9.8
    b802e000-b8036000 r--p 00132000 08:01 5103735 /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libcrypto.so.0.9.8
    b8036000-b8043000 rw-p 0013a000 08:01 5103735 /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libcrypto.so.0.9.8
    b8043000-b8047000 rw-p b8043000 00:00 0
    b8047000-b8070000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 5065335 /usr/lib/libpcap.so.0.9.8
    b8070000-b8071000 r--p 00028000 08:01 5065335 /usr/lib/libpcap.so.0.9.8
    b8071000-b8072000 rw-p 00029000 08:01 5065335 /usr/lib/libpcap.so.0.9.8
    b8072000-b807f000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 6717502 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1
    b807f000-b8080000 r--p 0000c000 08:01 6717502 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1
    b8080000-b8081000 rw-p 0000d000 08:01 6717502 /lib/libgcc_s.so.1
    b8081000-b8085000 rw-p b8081000 00:00 0
    b8085000-b809f000 r-xp 00000000 08:01 6717460 /lib/ld-2.8.90.so
    b809f000-b80a0000 rw-p b809f000 00:00 0
    b80a0000-b80a1000 r--p 0001a000 08:01 6717460 /lib/ld-2.8.90.so
    b80a1000-b80a2000 rw-p 0001b000 08:01 6717460 /lib/ld-2.8.90.so
    bfb8c000-bfba1000 rw-p bffeb000 00:00 0 [stack]
    ffffe000-fffff000 r-xp 00000000 00:00 0 [vdso]
    Aborted
    Wiffy-Auto-Cracker - was the best thing that ever happen to me. :) Wo0oT :)
    AWUSO36H_500mW_5dBi Antenna

  2. #2
    My life is this forum Snayler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,418

    Default

    I read it somewhere that with airolib you would only save about 5min.
    Don't remember where, but you can take a look at this thread:
    Airolib-ng and cowpatty

  3. #3
    Good friend of the forums
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    425

    Default

    On my computer aircrack is 1500k/s and airolib is 100k/s

    edit
    don't know why aircrack is faster than airolib and cowpatty using cpu and the latter does less work.

  4. #4
    Good friend of the forums Eatme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socks5
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by compaq View Post
    On my computer aircrack is 1500k/s and airolib is 100k/s

    vote aircrack
    nice!

    but why you dont wanna save the data so the next time you want test/crack that same essid it will run even 5x faster with airolib-ng. if your aircrack-ng is that fast then it can be boosted to almost 160,000.k/s

    Time is the only con here, thats what im not liking atm.
    Wiffy-Auto-Cracker - was the best thing that ever happen to me. :) Wo0oT :)
    AWUSO36H_500mW_5dBi Antenna

  5. #5
    Good friend of the forums
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    425

    Default

    nice!

    but why you dont wanna save the data so the next time you want test/crack that same essid it will run even 5x faster with airolib-ng. if your aircrack-ng is that fast then it can be boosted to almost 160,000.k/s

    Time is the only con here, thats what im not liking atm.
    In the aircrack source (do_wpa_crack) were its got gen pmk put a fputs(pmk) and fputs(key) , then use pyrit to crack the database.
    Use aircracks speed to gen a table and pyrit for the table genated
    best of both worlds

  6. #6
    Good friend of the forums Eatme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socks5
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by compaq View Post
    In the aircrack source (do_wpa_crack) were its got gen pmk put a fputs(pmk) and fputs(key) , then use pyrit to crack the database.
    Use aircracks speed to gen a table and pyrit for the table genated
    best of both worlds
    so ur saying pryit+cowpatty is faster then Airolib+aircrack ?
    Wiffy-Auto-Cracker - was the best thing that ever happen to me. :) Wo0oT :)
    AWUSO36H_500mW_5dBi Antenna

  7. #7
    My life is this forum Snayler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eatme View Post
    Well I guess, that sums my thoughts up. We all know Airolib-ng is better to use imo. cuz it saves data for later use. I just wanted to see how far or how close they both finished in real time.
    I guess thats why Airolib-ng+Aircrack-ng method is your best bet to go with if you do a lot of WPA cracking.
    thanks for the info.
    I changed the info since i realized that aircrack speeds also depends on the processor speed (wasn't thinking right) So i stick with the 5 minutes diference. But as i remember, it was 25 to 30 min diference. So considering that, maybe if aircrack takes 1hour, airolib would take 50min (10min difference). But i'm not sure of any of this since a can't find the source.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eatme View Post
    I tired it, and got this....0.o wtf happen
    It's a known problem, you need to update your cowpatty. i think there's a thread on this here in the forums.

  8. #8
    Developer
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    6,126

    Default

    Should be a simple test. I am doing it right now. I will post the results. By the way it will only be accurate if you do the test on the same computer.


    so ur saying pryit+cowpatty is faster then Airolib+aircrack ?
    This is like comparing apples to oranges since pyrit is a gpu powered tool and airolib-ng is not. Although the tools were both written by the same person.

  9. #9
    Good friend of the forums
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    425

    Default

    so ur saying pryit+cowpatty is faster then Airolib+aircrack ?
    airolib uses sqlite for the database, but the idea was to dump the pmk and password in one line, in the same format that pyrit(or cowpatty forgot which one) uses, then use pyrit or cowpatty tool to do the ptk and mic.

  10. #10
    Good friend of the forums Eatme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Socks5
    Posts
    308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pureh@te View Post
    Should be a simple test. I am doing it right now. I will post the results. By the way it will only be accurate if you do the test on the same computer.
    cool, thanks for testing it....

    yea thats true, you will have to do it on the same computer(hardware), but not at the same time, since that will slow things up, and give in-accurate readings..

    Quote Originally Posted by Snayler View Post
    It's a known problem, you need to update your cowpatty. i think there's a thread on this here in the forums.
    OK. ty im go search for it and test this method and compared with aircrack+airolib.. see which is faster on my hardware cuz that does make a difference as well. im using version cowpatty 4.3 btw

    EDIT:
    OK 4.6 installed...tested it and i get same speeds as Airolib+Aircrack. lol actually aircrack was faster tho..about 3k faster.

    EDIT:
    OK restarted vmware, and airolib+cowpatty boosted up to 96k k/s. While Airolib+Aircrack was still going at its same speed as before..damn i guess this method is better then aircrack. nice. ill use this for now on.
    Wiffy-Auto-Cracker - was the best thing that ever happen to me. :) Wo0oT :)
    AWUSO36H_500mW_5dBi Antenna

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •