the password string is some kind of like that
MTY5LTYtNjEtMjAxLTkwLTE3MS05My0yMDAtMTMxLTE5Mi01My0xNjItMC0yMjAtMTgxLTIyNg==
I tried base 64 encoder and it gives me:
169-6-61-201-90-171-93-200-131-192-53-162-0-220-181-226
Looks like encode by ASCII Code
I put the numbers on ASCII code list gives me :
©=ÉZ«]ȃÀ5¢Üµâ
But this not the password that i looked.
Does anyone know the solution.
I am not an expert sorry for bad explaining.
The string contains 16 numbergroups and each number is between 0 and 255. So it looks like 16 bytes. And 16 bytes / 128 bits is the size of an md5 hash. So that would be my guess.
While a crypto hash function can't be easily reversed, there are online rainbowtable services which can revert them for short or common inputs. But if the programmer who wrote it did it right (used a salt and many iterations) they won't help.
I'd split it in 16 numbers, than convert these to a byte array of size 16, and then hexencode them, since that's the form most programs will accept. Edit: See Kenny's comment
And then search for some website which allows search in rainbow tables. And pray...
Related
I would like to ask if there is a way to encrypt text (no matter how long it is) and ALWAYS get a fixed length decryption? I am not referring to hashing but to encryption/decryption.
Example:
Suppose that we want to encrypt (not hash) a text which is 60 characters long. The result will be a string which is 32 characters long. We can then decrypt the string to get the original text!
We now want to encrypt (not hash) a text which is 200 characters long. The result will be a string which is again 32 characters long. We can then decrypt the string to get the original text!
Is that somehow possible?
Thank you
As the comments indicate, this is impossible. For the underlying reason that this is impossible, see the Pigeonhole Principle. In your example, there are 256^200 inputs and 256^32 outputs. Therefore there must be at least 1 output that has more than 1 input, and therefore is impossible to reverse. Since the number of inputs is massively larger than the number of outputs (and in the general case, is unbounded), almost all cipher texts are necessarily impossible to decrypt.
I have a requirement where in I get a HEX string which is 32 character long. I need to encrypt it with AES-128-ECB and get an Hex string with is again 32 character long.
I have been asked to convert the 32 char hex string to binary stream(to get 16 bytes of data) and then encrypt it using AES-ECB(to get 16 bytes of encrypted data) and then convert this 16 bytes of encrypted data to 32 char hex string.
I came across this article to achieve AES-ECB encryption.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/HermannSW/entry/gatewayscript_modules_aes?lang=en
Kindly let me know how to achieve this.
Other than the actual code you have the concept, for more detailed help you will need to make a best-effort attempt and add that code to the question along with error information and input/output test data (in hex).
Note that you need to ensure that padding is not added, some AES implementations add padding by default and will add a block of (PKCS#7) padding to data that is an exact multiple of the block size (16-bytes for AES).
Note: ECB mode, it is insecure when the key is used more than once and there is a similarity in the data. See ECB mode, scroll down to the Penguin.
I have this piece of decoded message, it's a homework but i can't solve it, the message is
IZWGCZZ2EBAUWRSVOJAU45DSOVCEOZKS
N5CHKQLSM5GGSQ2VNVIECUSEIU======
there is a hint saying The string is encoded using an unusual number base. The numbers 2 - 7 are represented and the letters A - Z are represented.
i have looked into the internet but i couldn't find anything, please if anyone could help understand this problem and solve it i would appreciate it
Let's see: A-Z + 2-7 = 32 possible values.
32 values can be contained in 5 bits, thus each byte of the message represents 5 bits.
To decode, each of those 5 bits have to be put together in one long bit-string which is then read as an 8 bit ASCII string.
Or, in other words: Base32 encoding.
So:
IZWGCZZ2EBAUWRSVOJAU45DSOVCEOZKSN5CHKQLSM5GGSQ2VNVIECUSEIU======
converts to:
Flag: AKFUrANtruDGeRoDuArgLiCUmPARDE
See here to test the decoding.
I'm trying to find 2 different plain text words that create very similar hashes.
I'm using the hashing method 'whirlpool', but I don't really need my question to be answered in the case or whirlpool, if you can using md5 or something easier that's ok.
The similarities i'm looking for is that they contain the same number of letters (doesnt matter how much they're jangled up)
i.e
plaintext 'test'
hash 1: abbb5 has 1 a , 3 b's , one 5
plaintext 'blahblah'
hash 2: b5bab must have the same, but doesnt matter what order.
I'm sure I can read up on how they're created and break it down and reverse it, but I am just wondering if what I'm talking about occurs.
I'm wondering because I haven't found a match of what I'm explaining (I created a PoC to run threw random words / letters till it recreated a similar match), but then again It would take forever doing it the way i was dong it. and was wondering if anyone with real knowledge of hashes / encryption would help me out.
So you can do it like this:
create an empty sorted map \
create a 64 bit counter (you don't need more than 2^63 inputs, in all probability, since you would be dead before they would be calculated - unless quantum crypto really takes off)
use the counter as input, probably easiest to encode it in 8 bytes;
use this as input for your hash function;
encode output of hash in hex (use ASCII bytes, for speed);
sort hex on number / alphabetically (same thing really)
check if sorted hex result is a key in the map
if it is, show hex result, the old counter from the map & the current counter (and stop)
if it isn't, put the sorted hex result in the map, with the counter as value
increase counter, goto 3
That's all folks. Results for SHA-1:
011122344667788899999aaaabbbcccddeeeefff for both 320324 and 429678
I don't know why you want to do this for hex, the hashes will be so large that they won't look too much alike. If your alphabet is smaller, your code will run (even) quicker. If you use whole output bytes (i.e. 00 to FF instead of 0 to F) instead of hex, it will take much more time - a quick (non-optimized) test on my machine shows it doesn't finish in minutes and then runs out of memory.
Quite often one has to encode an big (e.g. 128 or 160 bits) number in an url. For example many web applications use md5(random()) for UUIDs.
If you need to put that value in an URL the common approach is to just encode it as an hexadecimal string.
But obviously hex encoding is not a very tight encoding. What other approaches are there which fit nicely in an URL?
I would use The "URL and Filename safe" Base 64 Alphabet.
Base 64 uses two character sets.
Data: ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789+/
URLs: ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789-_
To use base 64 you need to pad your value to be a multiple of 3 bytes long (24 bits) then split those 24 bits into 4 6bit bytes. Each 6bit value is looked up by position in the string I gave above.
If it all goes well, your final base64 value will always be a multiple of 4 characters long and decode back to a multiple of 3 (8bit) bytes long.
Depending on the language you are using, a lot of them have built in encode and decode functions.
You can do even better with base64-url encoding (a-z, A-Z, 0-9, - and _ [see RFC4648 Section 5]). RFC4648 covers a number of different encoding methods (base16, base32, and base64) an a couple of variants. Also depending on the sparsity of the bits that are set in the number you could conceivably run it through gzip and then use one of the described encoding methods. Of course use of gzip really depends on how large the number you are going to be encoding is.
If you want it tight you can use a base-36 encoding (from 0 to Z).
Using the hint of base36 I currently use something like this (in Python):
>>> str(base64.b32encode(uuid.uuid1().bytes).rstrip('='))
'MTB2ONDSL3YWJN3CA6XIG7O4HM'
Just use hex. Even if you were to get 8 bits per character you're still using a 16-20 character random sequence, which nobody will want to type or say. If you can't put up a short identifier, work on your search capabilities.