[deleted]
Passwordle
191–200 of 263 posts
Re: Passwordle
#192There is like... four people I know I could send this to who'd laugh, it's so niche. Yet I also laughed out loud when I got how conventionally impossible it is.
Winners never quit. And quitters never win. But those who never win AND never quit are idiots.
That's because winners know when not to play.
Re: Passwordle
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not necessarily. The hash could have been generated with something other than javascript. In fact because functions like sha256 are iterative it's possible to hash a password which is longer than the RAM in a system. Technically possible to hash a password which is longer than storage in a system too, if you don't care about storing the password.
so the puzzle author could "cheat" and just present a 256-bit number and not know the preimage at all, which would be a fun shortcut.
Huh, I realize I don’t know the answer to this seemingly simple question. Are all 256 bit vectors valid sha-256 hashes?
Re: Passwordle
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a very large number of offline guesses Right, the entire search space of random passwords. The matching hash characters are tongue-in-cheek. They don't help you. They could've just given you the entire hash up front and you would still have to search the entire random password space. Sure, you could do it "offline", but it would still take forever to compute
This is the best description of why it's completely infeasible to make a system to guess it. It would be only be possible if the password length was below a certain threshold (maybe 30 characters) beyond that limit, there wouldn't be enough atoms in the known universe in order to store every hash/password combination.... making it physically impossible....
In passwordle, the input is a 14 character password made up of letters, numbers, and punctuation, chosen with some bias. There's less than 92 bits of entropy (the bias shaves off a few bits of effective entropy but I'm too lazy to calculate it).
That is-- out of the range of current brute force, but if it were just a few characters shorter, it could be attacked with this oracle technique no problem.
Re: Passwordle
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, anything past 256 bits is going to have a collision, so that doesn't matter, but you're right that the entire point of a hash is that even if you know the hash, it's very very hard to find what the plaintext is.
There are a number of reversible hash algos. The point of hash is that the small changes in the input produce big changes in the output so even a 1-bit change to the input produces a completely different output. Some hash algos having trap door functionality is really more of a bonus.
Sure, I guess I wasn't being specific enough. Once of the reasons to use SHA-256 is because that's hard to do.
Re: Passwordle
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Eh, the actual search space for reasonable online guesses is cut down by 10000x." Only in theory . In order to determine which 9999 out of 10000 guesses are no longer relevant, the only known method you have is to compute the hashes of all the 10000 representatives anyhow... which is, again, the exact same problem you started out with at the beginning. You have theoretical information because you've made theoretical…
> In fact, we can play that game right now. The SHA256 hash [1] of "mlyle" is "CAD9051E126DA9BC7CB4048C4CA28804CCFEE0E3824F4E63FC151BC5E30B96D0". Using this information, please produce a password with the hash CAD9051E126DA9BC7CB4048C4CA28804CCFEE0E3824F4E63FC151BC5E30B96D1, differing only in the last bit. Ideally the shortest password using letters, numbers, and symbols in US ASCII, but honestly I'll take any binary…
"The game is, given a bunch of bits of the hash output, identify which of a known set of input produces that hash output."
No, it isn't. You don't have a list. This game generates a fully random password. I did one just now and the answer is "]=-CrGl0Sv.'L:". You don't have that on your list. This is Passwordle, not Wordle. Passwordle does not operate on a fixed list of answers.
Technically, it's drawing from a smaller set of possibilities than a full 256 bit search space but it's still large enough it won't matter.
You can not enumerate the possibilities for Passwordle.
Yes, if you cut the search space arbitrarily by something like 110 bits or so, the math works differently. So? That's not the game.
The difficulty of this game, and for that matter of reversing the hash in general, from a constant list is uninteresting. The whole point is stranding you in an infeasibly large search space.
Your strategy completely depends on having a list of precomputed hashes for the entire search space. You don't and can't, so your strategy is completely nonfunctional and useless. Pounding on the details of your nonfunctional strategy will not make it functional.
Re: Passwordle
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah because the algo is known, it is SHA256. The thing is you don't know the length of the password. It could be more than the number of hydrogen atoms in the universe, or 12. You still have to brute force or look up one possible solution (or collision thereof). The whole thing just shows that a hash makes ZERO applicable inferable assertions about the message (password). Thats the definition of evenly distributed h…
> It could be more than the number of hydrogen atoms in the universe Not very likely, since the OP wouldn’t be able to hash it. Or he’s secretly demonstrating something much more awesome than Passwordle.
Who said they hashed it? The correct answer is a 256-bit value, and you're trying to guess any string that hashes to that value. Nothing requires that OP generated that value by hashing a string though...
Re: Passwordle
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In fact, we can play that game right now. The SHA256 hash [1] of "mlyle" is "CAD9051E126DA9BC7CB4048C4CA28804CCFEE0E3824F4E63FC151BC5E30B96D0". Using this information, please produce a password with the hash CAD9051E126DA9BC7CB4048C4CA28804CCFEE0E3824F4E63FC151BC5E30B96D1, differing only in the last bit. Ideally the shortest password using letters, numbers, and symbols in US ASCII, but honestly I'll take any binary…
"The game is, given a bunch of bits of the hash output, identify which of a known set of input produces that hash output." No, it isn't. You don't have a list. This game generates a fully random password. I did one just now and the answer is "]=-CrGl0Sv.'L:". You don't have that on your list. This is Passwordle, not Wordle . Passwordle does not operate on a fixed list of answers. Technically, it's drawing from a smal…
> Yes, if you cut the search space arbitrarily by something like 110 bits or so, the math works differently. So? That's not the game.
See- the search space is already significantly under 256-110 bits.
The search space is a bit smaller than 92 bits in passwordle. If it drew uniformly from the possible characters it would be 92 bits; it's more like 87-88 bits since it does not draw uniformly.
This is out of reach of brute force--- as I've said the entire time-- but if it were just a few characters shorter it would be within reach. 11 is doable with a lot of computing; 9 would be trivially doable. They chose 14 characters of input.
This is an interesting offline-online tradeoff. 10 guesses doesn't get you far vs. a 9 character random password in practice. But 10 guesses with this oracle lets you defeat 9 character random passwords easily. (and provides enough information to defeat 14 character random passwords, but with no feasible search strategy known at this time).
This is very different from "provides no information whatsoever". I suspect you not appreciating this is why we have a difference of opinion.
> Your strategy completely depends on having a list of precomputed hashes for the entire search space.
It depends upon being able to do a meaningful amount of search offline-- either precomputed or before your last guess.
Re: Passwordle
#199There is like... four people I know I could send this to who'd laugh, it's so niche. Yet I also laughed out loud when I got how conventionally impossible it is.
Well, it made me laugh. Thanks, that's what the Internet is for! (Namely, amusing content about the technicalities of the Internet.)
Re: Passwordle
#200There is like... four people I know I could send this to who'd laugh, it's so niche. Yet I also laughed out loud when I got how conventionally impossible it is.
You can easily guess the right sha256 just using random strings and overlapping correct characters and then you can run a dictionary attack on it, or a brute force one if it's not too long.
Well, go ahead, we're waiting.