SectripCUDA

is comin

How did you find out the salt?

The Salt Must Flow!!!

http://www.win.tue.nl/cccc/engineyard/search5.cu
15 mil trips/sec at least

And this is why secure trips are stupid.

They're no more secure, because security by obscurity doesn't work.

>>7
Trolled by progressed and ingenuity

>>7
Nobody that's enlightened have ever considered secure trips to be secure.

>>7
They're just site-specific trips. If the salt isn't known, faking them is unlikely. If the salt is known, they're no more secure than regular trips.

0x15,0x6e,0x88,0xe4,0x4b,0x37,0xd7,0x5a,0xf6,0x25,0x5e,0x84,0x25,0x29,0xeb,
0x47,0x6f,0xa1,0xc3,0x7e,0xe3,0x21,0xf1,0x88,0xd0,0x50,0x74,0x5d,0x4e,0x7e,
0xf6,0x5b,0x9a,0xf6,0x20,0x82,0xaf,0x08,0x24,0x64,0x35,0x51,0x67,0xed,0x4f,
0xb8,0x29,0x6a,0x0b,0xee,0xfc,0x16,0x20,0x3a,0x86,0x18,0x57,0x53,0x5a,0x2a,
0xe8,0xec,0x85,0xc7,0xf3,0x16,0x63,0x1e,0xad,0x2a,0xc6,0x1e,0x48,0x0f,0x1c,
0x02,0xcf,0x7a,0xf4,0xd3,0x4c,0x43,0xdf,0x12,0xcd,0xd2,0xc5,0x0f,0xb6,0x62,
0x7c,0x71,0x6b,0x78,0xd7,0x6b,0x7e,0xe6,0xf7,0xc4,0xd4,0x01,0x53,0x6d,0x6b,
0x92,0x77,0xed,0x74,0x44,0x85,0x45,0x35,0x2b,0xe3,0x89,0xea,0x09,0x9d,0x30,
0xcb,0x35,0x55,0x0f,0x24,0x86,0x51,0x99,0x1b,0xb7,0x21,0xe1,0x9e,0x3f,0x9c,
0x92,0x76,0xd9,0xa8,0x3b,0xbf,0xc2,0x38,0x57,0xfc,0x78,0xd2,0x8a,0xd4,0x5b,
0xb6,0x8b,0x69,0xa3,0x38,0x45,0xe0,0x2f,0x45,0xf8,0xca,0x10,0x0a,0xbd,0xcb,
0x80,0xa8,0x3e,0x0a,0x26,0x07,0xb3,0x73,0xe1,0x77,0x7c,0x64,0xe9,0x40,0xb6,
0x04,0x6d,0x84,0x53,0xcd,0xcf,0x8a,0x09,0xc9,0x30,0xe0,0x9f,0xc7,0x30,0x34,
0xda,0x0a,0x55,0x1e,0xec,0x32,0xde,0xcc,0x7b,0x85,0x7e,0x32,0xbc,0xe6,0x01,
0xbe,0x8d,0x24,0x0a,0xc9,0x3b,0x07,0x90,0xd4,0x44,0x16,0x8d,0x58,0x7d,0x2c,
0xad,0x6c,0xf8,0x32,0x95,0xd1,0x70,0x39,0x5e,0xb4,0x61,0x82,0x78,0xa3,0xb3,
0xf4,0x79,0xf5,0x59,0x72,0x6e,0xef,0xc6,0x5d,0xc4,0x2e,0x7c,0x54,0x39,0x76,
0xd1,0x42,0x13,0xf5,0xea,0xf9,0x40,0xb9,0xd6,0x88,0x5d,0x60,0x88,0x81,0x90,
0x5d,0x03,0x2a,0x04,0x1f,0x91,0x77,0x8f,0x3f,0xb2,0xe1,0x16,0x00,0xe1,0xf6,
0x1f,0xd5,0x98,0x8a,0x64,0xc9,0x59,0x3a,0xca,0xdf,0xde,0xc7,0x31,0x67,0xa9,
0x2b,0xa2,0xc9,0x69,0x40,0x79,0x19,0xd2,0x24,0xe7,0xa6,0x40,0x50,0xb8,0xe0,
0x64,0x1d,0xbd,0xab,0x1f,0x02,0x97,0xed,0x4a,0xd0,0x95,0x90,0xd1,0x22,0x39,
0x2e,0xb7,0x63,0x83,0x26,0x59,0x51,0x35,0xfc,0x2c,0x1f,0xfa,0x0a,0x88,0xb1,
0xf5,0xee,0xbe,0xdd,0xcd,0x39,0x3e,0x4e,0x81,0x8b,0x51,0x96,0xb0,0xc5,0x9c,
0x25,0x47,0xfb,0xac,0xbf,0x6d,0xa6,0xcc,0x51,0x3a,0xda,0xb4,0x00,0x04,0x01,
0x3d,0x0d,0x2b,0x4e,0x5b,0x2d,0x14,0x4c,0xe2,0xc2,0x6d,0xef,0x45,0xa4,0xd9,
0xbc,0xf4,0x5b,0xa1,0x07,0xd1,0x12,0xd6,0xb4,0xf5,0x50,0x3e,0xb5,0x18,0x96,
0x7c,0xdd,0xd7,0x3f,0xed,0x5b,0x6c,0xc4,0xbd,0x7b,0x12,0x9a,0x70,0x62,0xcc,
0xc5,0x1f,0xdb,0x98,0xee,0x40,0xe7,0xb0,0x20,0x40,0x5f,0x9b,0x3e,0x38,0x62,
0x7f,0x93,0x3f,0x38,0xe2,0x7a,0x27,0xfe,0xfa,0xab,0x42,0x43,0x1c
_salty

>>7
The algorithm is public, the salt/key is just (supposed to be) secret. That's not security through obscurity, that's just how every cryptosystem everywhere works.

>>12
it's only secure because the salt/key is obscure. that's what security through obscurity is. the fact that every cryptosystem everywhere also relies on security through obscurity doesn't change that.

>>13
You're an idiot, I hope you know this.

>>13
I don't think you understand what ``security through obscurity'' means. It usually means that something is hidden, but attainable for the user (for example DRM works like that, they give the user the key, but they will attempt to obscure/hide the key through various ways). In real cryptosystems, the key only belongs to the parties that need it (symmetric crypto would mean that only parties that need to write/read the data have the key, in public key crypto, the private keys are kept private and only one person has them). In the case of world4ch, the salt is supposed to be a private secret, but I assume that since it's a web server and they kept the file accessible via http, one day the permissions were incorrectly set and someone obtained the salt, thus the secret was exposed and the crypto scheme became insecure. To fix this, they would have to change the salt, but that would change everyone's secure tripcodes. They could either do that, or just give up the secure part of the secure tripcodes in exchange for people maintaining their old secure tripcodes.

>>15
the salt is easily obtainable, given enough time.

>>16
Anything is easy given enough time. When your time exceeds the life expectancy of the universe, at some point you have to admit you're full of shit.

>>17
or an expert xkcd reader
http://xkcd.com/538/

>>11
Actually true, quite nice. Now I guess we can look forward to three years of ridiculously slow crackers until a Japanese person comes along.

>>19
http://harry.lu/mty/

>>19
^* backward

Oh, this is just great...

>>20
thats crypt, not sha1. >>6[b][\b]-san's link has a sha1 c cuda implementation which was used to win this¹ contest.

^[1] http://www.engineyard.com/blog/2009/programming-contest-win-iphone-3gs-2k-cloud-credit/

>>23
Xarn failure.

>>24{b }*-san.
This is what a Xarn failure would look like.

>>6
For anyone trying to compile this code, you have to use a old version of gcc because otherwise you have to redo all the operator overloading because they gayed it up in newer versions.

>>26
Maybe you shouldn't be compiling Sepples with a C compiler in the first place.

>>26
GAY MY ANUS

Well, Xarn seems to be working on something. http://twitpic.com/1uk8oq/full

>>29

Thanks for that, Sarn

>>30
* Zarn

>>31
*Sean

>>32
*Jean

>>29
Why isn't he CUDAing?

my other CUDA is CUDR

>>34
It's because Xarn is just an amateur.

lol,
test

>>34
Probably for the same reason he went multiprocess for regular tripcodes: because he has a Beowulf cluster of machines without video cards.

>>39
What an unfortunate decision for you Xarn. Should have gotten a cluster of machines with quadros.