Index
> Macroinstructions > MD5 (Need help topic). |
| Author |
|
|
vid 09 Jun 2007, 23:39
you are searching for procedure not macro
|
|||
09 Jun 2007, 23:39 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 10 Jun 2007, 00:33
Or really a macro and "call" is a typo error.
CFJ0, by "encrypt" you mean calculate MD5 hash? For assembly-time strings you can use a macro but for run-time strings you need to write a procedure as vid pointed out. |
|||
|
10 Jun 2007, 00:33 |
|
|
CFJ0 10 Jun 2007, 12:30
Yea calculate md5 hash :S
|
|||
|
10 Jun 2007, 12:30 |
|
|
revolution 10 Jun 2007, 22:58
You might be interested in SHA512 macros for fasm. SHA512 is more secure than the broken MD5.
|
|||
|
10 Jun 2007, 22:58 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 10 Jun 2007, 23:13
Quote:
Do you have any link? (excluding rainbow tables). |
|||
|
10 Jun 2007, 23:13 |
|
|
vid 10 Jun 2007, 23:55
Loco: Google for "Vlastimil Klima". Yes, MD5 is broken.
|
|||
|
10 Jun 2007, 23:55 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 11 Jun 2007, 00:24
Googled it. I have to finish a project before the deadline (2 hours) so I'll take a deep look into it tomorrow
Thanks vid |
|||
|
11 Jun 2007, 00:24 |
|
|
SomeoneNew 24 Dec 2007, 04:35
It's not broken ffs, just add salt & pepper to the hash and they wont guess it even by force in an year unless you're talking about the US gov. It would be easier to just disassemble de hasher or get the source by hacking force than trying to bruteforce a salted hash ffs.
|
|||
|
24 Dec 2007, 04:35 |
|
|
revolution 24 Dec 2007, 04:56
SomeoneNew wrote: It's not broken ffs, just add salt & pepper to the hash and they wont guess it even by force in an year unless you're talking about the US gov. It would be easier to just disassemble de hasher or get the source by hacking force than trying to bruteforce a salted hash ffs. |
|||
|
24 Dec 2007, 04:56 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|