EvilZone
Other => Found it on the Webs => : ande January 26, 2012, 07:03:54 PM
-
Just saw it posted on facebook:
http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/ (http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/)
Seams like a interesting project :)
Software to identify the different types of hashes used to encrypt data and especially passwords.
(http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/2990/hashid.png)
Encryption formats supported:
- ADLER-32
- CRC-32
- CRC-32B
- CRC-16
- CRC-16-CCITT
- DES(Unix)
- FCS-16
- GHash-32-3
- GHash-32-5
- GOST R 34.11-94
- Haval-160
- Haval-192 110080 ,Haval-224 114080 ,Haval-256
- Lineage II C4
- Domain Cached Credentials
- XOR-32
- MD5(Half)
- MD5(Middle)
- MySQL
- MD5(phpBB3)
- MD5(Unix)
- MD5(Wordpress)
- MD5(APR)
- Haval-128
- MD2
- MD4
- MD5
- MD5(HMAC(Wordpress))
- NTLM
- RAdmin v2.x
- RipeMD-128
- SNEFRU-128
- Tiger-128
- MySQL5 - SHA-1(SHA-1($pass))
- MySQL 160bit - SHA-1(SHA-1($pass))
- RipeMD-160
- SHA-1
- SHA-1(MaNGOS)
- Tiger-160
- Tiger-192
- md5($pass.$salt) - Joomla
- SHA-1(Django)
- SHA-224
- RipeMD-256
- SNEFRU-256
- md5($pass.$salt) - Joomla
- SAM - (LM_hash:NT_hash)
- SHA-256(Django)
- RipeMD-320
- SHA-384
- SHA-256
- SHA-384(Django)
- SHA-512
- Whirlpool
- And more…
Encryption algorithms that can not be differentiated unless they have been decrypted, so the efficiency of the software also depends on the user's criteria.
-
Brutal!! That not only returns what has been hashed but also witch function was used? That must take a few minutes, or hours to run if the hash is not in a dictionary or a database.
-
Brutal!! That not only returns what has been hashed but also witch function was used? That must take a few minutes, or hours to run if the hash is not in a dictionary or a database.
I believe it only identifies what sort of hash/algorithm it MIGHT be. There is no way telling if a MD5(example) hash has been made by md5() or md5(md5()) etc. I guess it checks for length and prefixes often used by some hashes/algorithms.
-
I believe it only identifies what sort of hash/algorithm it MIGHT be. There is no way telling if a MD5(example) hash has been made by md5() or md5(md5()) etc. I guess it checks for length and prefixes often used by some hashes/algorithms.
Interesting! It may be very useful!
-
I'm not quite sure I understand how this works (properly). For most hashes it seems they are just comparing the length of the given hash with a typical hash for the encryption X. Then if the length matches and the hash is alphanumeric it adds a string / number to an array. For some hashes they are checking for some special pattern like $1$ for unix hashes. Finally they sort the array? It's kind of the late so I might not see it but at the moment I don't get how this can be reliable (I know how it works.. I just don't see how it can be reliable).
The source code for the lazies: http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py (http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py)
-
http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py (http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py)
that code made me sad. :'(
-
This is pretty old.. Any ways, someone has developer an online hash identifier that doesn't require a user to download code or python.
The site is located at: http://www.dfcode.org/onlinehashidentifier.php
Kindest Regards,
-
The source code for the lazies: http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py (http://code.google.com/p/hash-identifier/source/browse/trunk/Hash_ID_v1.1/Hash_ID.py)
Nominated for least dynamic code ever written..
-
Thanks for posting this , been looking for such a tool for a long time +1
haha, facebook.
-
that code made me sad. :'(
Me too. It is horrible to say the least.
-
It is aesthetically horrible, but since it uses basic constructs, it's probably more efficient, too.
Real programmers can write FORTRAN in any language. That's the old proverb.
-
It is aesthetically horrible, but since it uses basic constructs, it's probably more efficient, too.
Real programmers can write FORTRAN in any language. That's the old proverb.
Who cares about efficiency in a hash identifier?