GNU bug report logs - #57187
[PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 57187 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 57187 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 16:43:26 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello Guixers!

Attached you will find my first patch submitted here in awhile! I'm hoping I've followed the guidelines, they haven't really changed much that I can see. Also, if I incorrectly attached the file, do tell, as I'm on a new (Emacs + notmuch) email workflow!

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get hashcat to build reproducibly, and I'm not sure why, but 1) the 6.1.1 version wasn't reproducible, and 2) it's literally just a few bytes.

$ guix challenge hashcat
/gnu/store/d3piidwdm4l6i2hsppyzydslcdd1idkl-hashcat-6.1.1 contents differ:
  no local build for '/gnu/store/d3piidwdm4l6i2hsppyzydslcdd1idkl-hashcat-6.1.1'
  https://ci.guix.gnu.org/nar/lzip/d3piidwdm4l6i2hsppyzydslcdd1idkl-hashcat-6.1.1: 0bwc2zx3d15l6asa4hc1p70h9264q6mfyswfmj4ay1c9njlb9s19
  https://bordeaux.guix.gnu.org/nar/lzip/d3piidwdm4l6i2hsppyzydslcdd1idkl-hashcat-6.1.1: 10q84qw6ihc0cp7d0fnfpr4bl0rsf01s6nvmgiqh6p152a0lqzfv
  differing file:
    /bin/hashcat

$ diffoscope /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5 /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5-check
--- /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5
+++ /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5-check
│   --- /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5/bin
├── +++ /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5-check/bin
│ │   --- /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5/bin/hashcat
│ ├── +++ /gnu/store/c5a5p5yisam7wjxclvpa6agrsyarzjv8-hashcat-6.2.5-check/bin/hashcat
│ │ ├── objdump --line-numbers --disassemble --demangle --reloc --no-show-raw-insn --section=.text {}
│ │ │ @@ -66,15 +66,15 @@
│ │ │   jne    403acd <getpwuid_r <at> plt+0x18d>
│ │ │   mov    $0x4f5071,%esi
│ │ │   mov    %r14,%rdi
│ │ │   call   423400 <getpwuid_r <at> plt+0x1fac0>
│ │ │   mov    %rbx,%r8
│ │ │   mov    %r13d,%ecx
│ │ │   mov    $0x4f4e40,%edx
│ │ │ + mov    $0x62f800f1,%r9d
│ │ │ - mov    $0x62f6b8f8,%r9d
│ │ │   mov    $0x4f4e88,%esi
│ │ │   mov    %r14,%rdi
│ │ │   call   405f90 <getpwuid_r <at> plt+0x2650>
│ │ │   mov    %eax,%r12d
│ │ │   test   %eax,%eax
│ │ │   je     403aaa <getpwuid_r <at> plt+0x16a>
│ │ │   or     $0xffffffff,%r12d

Hope this helps!

--
Hendursaga

[0001-gnu-hashcat-Update-to-6.2.5.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "(" <paren <at> disroot.org>
To: "Hendursaga" <hendursaga <at> aol.com>, <57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#57187] [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:09:49 +0100

On Sat Aug 13, 2022 at 9:43 PM BST, Hendursaga via Guix-patches via wrote:
> Also, if I incorrectly attached the file, do tell, as I'm on a new (Emacs + notmuch) email workflow!

Although I'm not sure whether it's explicitly better practise, I usually
use `git send-email` to embed patches directly in a set of emails, instead
of using attachments.

Re reproducibility: The fact that it's the same large number but slightly
larger seems to suggest that they might be embedding timestamps, so I tried
grepping around in the hashcat source, but couldn't find anything like
__DATE__ or __TIME__.

    -- (

Message #11 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
To: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
Cc: 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57187] [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 01:22:52 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hendursaga via Guix-patches via 写道：
> │ │ │ + mov    $0x62f800f1,%r9d
> │ │ │ - mov    $0x62f6b8f8,%r9d

Definitely a timestamp:

  λ date -d @1660420337
  Sat 13 Aug 2022 21:52:17 CEST

Kind regards,

T G-R

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #17 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Cc: 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57187] [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 22:13:54 -0400

> Definitely a timestamp:
>
>    λ date -d @1660420337
>    Sat 13 Aug 2022 21:52:17 CEST

Figured as much!

Given the above disassembly, there is only one direct reference to getpwuid_r in the codebase[1] and I'm not sure how that would affect reproducibility. Anyone else have any ideas? Should I report this upstream, perhaps?

Hendursaga

[1] https://github.com/hashcat/hashcat/blob/v6.2.5/src/folder.c#L384

Message #25 received at 57187-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
Cc: 57187-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#57187: [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2022 17:14:05 +0200

Hi,

Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com> skribis:

> Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get hashcat to build reproducibly, and I'm not sure why, but 1) the 6.1.1 version wasn't reproducible, and 2) it's literally just a few bytes.

Since this is not a regression, I went ahead and applied it.

However, it’d be nice to address it of course.  But first, I think we
should remove the bundled OpenCL headers as well as zlib.  Could you
give it a try?

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #28 received at 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>, 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57187] [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 13:26:46 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I think I might have found the reproducibility problem:

src/Makefile has a line

> ./src/Makefile:COMPTIME                := $(shell date +%s)
and

./src/Makefile:    $(CC)    $(CFLAGS_NATIVE) $^ -o $@ $(HASHCAT_LIBRARY) 
$(LFLAGS_NATIVE) -DCOMPTIME=$(COMPTIME) -DVERSION_TAG=\"$(VERSION_TAG)\" 
-DINSTALL_FOLDER=\"$(INSTALL_FOLDER)\" 
-DSHARED_FOLDER=\"$(SHARED_FOLDER)\" 
-DDOCUMENT_FOLDER=\"$(DOCUMENT_FOLDER)\"

comptime seems to be only ever set, never actually used, so it should be 
safe to replace it with 0. I'll try a patch.

[OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc (application/pgp-keys, attachment)]

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #31 received at 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
To: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>, 57187 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#57187] [PATCH] Update hashcat to 6.2.5
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 19:51:48 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 03-09-2022 13:26, Maxime Devos wrote:
> I think I might have found the reproducibility problem:
>
> src/Makefile has a line
>
>> ./src/Makefile:COMPTIME                := $(shell date +%s)
> and
>
> ./src/Makefile:    $(CC)    $(CFLAGS_NATIVE) $^ -o $@ 
> $(HASHCAT_LIBRARY) $(LFLAGS_NATIVE) -DCOMPTIME=$(COMPTIME) 
> -DVERSION_TAG=\"$(VERSION_TAG)\" 
> -DINSTALL_FOLDER=\"$(INSTALL_FOLDER)\" 
> -DSHARED_FOLDER=\"$(SHARED_FOLDER)\" 
> -DDOCUMENT_FOLDER=\"$(DOCUMENT_FOLDER)\"
>
> comptime seems to be only ever set, never actually used, so it should 
> be safe to replace it with 0. I'll try a patch.
See #57560

[OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc (application/pgp-keys, attachment)]

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #34 received at 57187-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be>
Cc: 57187-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 57560-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
Subject: Re: bug#57560: [PATCH 0/4] Fix multiple hashcat issue.
Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2022 23:08:12 +0200

Hi,

Maxime Devos <maximedevos <at> telenet.be> skribis:

> X-Debbugs-CC: Hendursaga <hendursaga <at> aol.com>
> X-Debbugs-CC: ( <paren <at> disroot.org>
> X-Debbugs-CC: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
> X-Debbugs-CC: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>

That didn’t work.  :-)

> This patch series:
>
>  * Removed bundled libraries, except for LZMA-SDK for which I didn't
>    find a corresponding Guix package
>  * Makes hashcat cross-compilable, at least from an x86_64-linux-gnu to
>    an aarch64-linux-gnu
>  * Removes the embedded build time timestamp reported in
>    <https://guix.gnu.org/57187>.

Perfect!  I’ve applied it all.

> My current working tree is a bit dirty, so there will be a small
> rebase conflict because of the 6.2.4->6.2.5 and a few imports will
> need to be moved to the top of the file.

Right, I had to fiddle quite a bit with the patches to get them to
apply.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.