| | |||||
| ||||||||
| Programming PHP, Perl, Ruby on Rails, AJAX, HTML, XHTML, CSS, JavaScript, MySQL and any other coding topics. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| | #26 (permalink) |
| Account Closed Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Mozambique
Posts: 607
![]() ![]() | From what i've read, mcrypt and base64 use a fixed algorithm for encrypting data so they know that by reversing that algo, it is decrypted. Now a hash like MD5 generates a random algorithm at the time of encryption, encrypts the string and now the algorithm doesn't exist anymore.. therefore irreversible. Correct me if I am wrong.. someone. |
| |
| | THREAD STARTER #27 (permalink) |
| Soon to be RICHdoggie! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: UK
Posts: 2,408
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | wow, that is absolutely ingenious! I would never have thought of that.Theoretically, that algorithm is reversible if found out though right? I am thinking if there is anyway of doing something like that, but then with a reversible function. Maybe storing an encryption key in the string or something? I suppose it will still be reversible, but then again the more ambiguous, the more secure right? |
| |
| | #29 (permalink) | ||||||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: NJ
Posts: 1,219
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/programming/199278-reversable-encryption-or-storing-passwords-online.html
well if there was a better way to encode (much much faster) than base64, that method above (minus the whole make the humongous number smaller thing) would probably be the best bet. as for decrypting it... ehhhhhhhhh -_- damn it i did all that work and realized that it would be impossible (or next to impossible) to decode that sort of encryption without the original password... well unless sum1 can think of one, cuz my brain is fried X_X but hey thats a good idea
__________________ Hacksar.com - Your source for random computer tips and tricks! MySiteMemberships.com - Keep track of your site registration information! Like my post? Rep is appreciated! | ||||||||
| |
| | THREAD STARTER #30 (permalink) |
| Soon to be RICHdoggie! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: UK
Posts: 2,408
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | lol - I think I will just take a key and do hurrendous mathematical stuff to it, and then base64 it a few times depending on the size of the resulting number! lol - a long string is a little bit OTT maybe. |
| |
| | #31 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: England
Posts: 1,034
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | I was thinking yesterday, that if you did a few random string manipulation things and character replacements before you md5() the string, it would be a million times more secure...because, when the hacker brute forces the hash, instead of getting the password he'll get the manipulated version, and they'd still have to know what replaces what before they get the original... And now that I think about that...imagine having a set of string replacements, then md5()'ing it, THEN manipulating the hash AGAIN and then md5()'ing it again... |
| |
| | THREAD STARTER #32 (permalink) |
| Soon to be RICHdoggie! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: UK
Posts: 2,408
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | kinda like my base64 method, but with md5? Thats a good idea, just to make it that little bit more secure. What I have done in the past is taken the first 16 letters of an md5 string and put them at the end. This way the string is different, but it also means more php code, and less efficient code. |
| |
| | #33 (permalink) |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: NJ
Posts: 1,219
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | but i thot the whole point of this was to make it decryptable... whats the point of using md5 if u cant decrypt that?
__________________ Hacksar.com - Your source for random computer tips and tricks! MySiteMemberships.com - Keep track of your site registration information! Like my post? Rep is appreciated! |
| |
| | #34 (permalink) |
| NamePros Regular Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 335
![]() ![]() | Just so you know, md5 is way more efficient than base64. Multiple instances anyways. On my server it seems to be different. http://www.ncisolutions.com/misc/base64_md5.php Try it out on your own server: PHP Code: Thanks to t.m. for the random characters function. *Added database functionality to track wins/losses
Last edited by Tree; 05-27-2006 at 02:42 PM.
|
| |
| | THREAD STARTER #35 (permalink) | ||||
| Soon to be RICHdoggie! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: UK
Posts: 2,408
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | nope... base64 is more efficient, it has won way more times...
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=199278 Tom | ||||
| |