(06-09-2011, 12:01 AM)spsum60 Wrote: Uhhh... Im pretty n00b at coding/programming, language stuffs, devices names n its definitions.
[questions]
1) Cn u explain wats the difference with javascript n vb.net?
2) how do u use dis code? (step by step)
3) cn dis be used for hackin accounts?
pls answer :o !! thx

(04-06-2013, 02:17 PM)Psycho_Coder Wrote: well this method would work only if the word has a length of 8, and that too all in lowercase.I think it would be wise to use a ArrayList of the characters with which we need to bruteforce the password, instead of using so many loops.

I think this is what that makes the program slow, since you have used 8 loops so it has a complexity of Big-O of 8 i.e. O(n^8) which is very inefficient. The method that I am telling that is using ArrayList of characters and then a loop to iterate the ArrayList and print the values, It will have a complexity of O(n^2), which is better.

well I maybe wrong, but this is my idea. I am sorry, if is said something wrong.

(04-06-2013, 02:57 PM)Deque Wrote:

(04-06-2013, 02:17 PM)Psycho_Coder Wrote: well this method would work only if the word has a length of 8, and that too all in lowercase.I think it would be wise to use a ArrayList of the characters with which we need to bruteforce the password, instead of using so many loops.

I think this is what that makes the program slow, since you have used 8 loops so it has a complexity of Big-O of 8 i.e. O(n^8) which is very inefficient. The method that I am telling that is using ArrayList of characters and then a loop to iterate the ArrayList and print the values, It will have a complexity of O(n^2), which is better.

well I maybe wrong, but this is my idea. I am sorry, if is said something wrong.

Please note that this thread is very old.

I don't think you can have a better time complexity. You can of course do it in more flexible manner. The missing flexibility is actually the big disadvantage of the code shown here.
But it is not slow in terms of time complexity. To talk about that in detail you need to clear a few things up: What is n for you? In this case it could be the length of the password, but since this algorithm shown above can only be used for one password length it is not possible to make an estimation about the time complexity for other inputs than n = 8.
Do you have pseudocode or real code for your algorithm?

The only possibilities I see in making this fast is by the usage of parallelism. This can be accomplished either with threads or the use of the GPU.
But it doesn't make sense to do this without the applying the concrete password cracking tasks to the parallel computation too.

Flexibility can be accomplished like I explained here:
http://www.hackcommunity.com/Thread-Tut-Create-a-wordlist-generator-i-e-for-bruteforcing

This is an alternative code I made after the same principle, because it is a bit better to handle (Java):

Code:

public class WordlistGen { private int wordNumber; private final int wordlength; private final char[] alphabet; private final long maxWords; private final int radix; /** * Inits a wordlist generator with given alphabet and wordlength * @param alphabet * @param wordlength */ public WordlistGen(char[] alphabet, int wordlength) { this.wordlength = wordlength; this.alphabet = alphabet; this.maxWords = (long) Math.pow(alphabet.length, wordlength); this.radix = alphabet.length; } /** * * @return next generated word, null if no word is left */ public String generateNext() { if (hasNext()) { int[] indices = convertToRadix(wordNumber); char[] word = new char[wordlength]; for (int k = 0; k < wordlength; k++) { word[k] = alphabet[indices[k]]; } wordNumber++; return new String(word); } return null; } /** * * @return true if there are more words to generate, false otherwise */ public boolean hasNext() { return (wordNumber < maxWords); } private int[] convertToRadix(long number) { int[] indices = new int[wordlength]; for (int i = wordlength - 1; i >= 0; i--) { if (number > 0) { int rest = (int) (number % radix); number /= radix; indices[i] = rest; } else { indices[i] = 0; } } return indices; } }