Make Custom File Type - Developers

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19629057]*Encrypted Latin ;P[/QUOTE] That's not Latin [editline]12:38AM[/editline] [QUOTE=zman115;19632364]Would it be possible to convert the username and password into bianary, multiply it by a number that the user chooses then save it to a text file that is hidden. Then the person enters their username, password, and chosen number and then bam there in?[/QUOTE] Look, just don't store passwords unless you absolutely have to. You can calculate a digest from the password, using an algorithm made by someone who's a bit better at it than you ([url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD5]MD5[/url] is pretty popular). It's impossible to reverse the function to find out what password exactly it stands for. Store the digest instead, and whenever you want to confirm a password, calculate its digest and compare it to the digest you have in database.

[QUOTE=Xama;19632288]Yes. Everyone read this and believe it, or else you're wrong. :downs:[/QUOTE] It's not about believing. A lot of the stuff on this page is just plain factual. It's not a religion.

It's a hacked version of latin. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorem_ipsum[/url]

Though it copies bits from a book by a man who, in my opinion, almost defines Classical Latin, I stand by my claim. Saying that it is written in a language is false, because its very intention is to have no meaning and be understood by no one. Its purpose isn't to communicate. It's merely a string of semi-random characters whose pattern is similar to Latin.

[QUOTE=gparent;19632803]It's not about believing. A lot of the stuff on this page is just plain factual. It's not a religion.[/QUOTE] Exactly.

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19631505][B]@gparent: [/B]I really just don't want to release it because the code is messy and the encryption algorithm isn't that great. I'll release the source when I make a better one. One worth giving it, it's own topic, and written in C++.[/QUOTE] As itsbth has already mentioned, that's not an encryption algorithm, just a really horrible obfuscator. A good sign of a useless encryption algorithm is when knowing the decryption method alone is enough to crack it. Notice how good algorithms like RSA and SHA256 are completely openly specified. edit: And for the people suggesting applying integral offsets to the data, they're useless, a single program can easily revert all of them to the ASCII specter. The bigger the data, the easier it gets for the program to accurately position the data as the original text.

Ok then, if its so useless, translate this back into it's original form. [code] »¯ç¯æ¿ßºê¯ÙÃÜ±íºä¯Ù©ì¨á«ç¿æ¿ë¬¤Ã˜¯ñ°ç¨í¿˜¯àºÙ°î¿Ý¯˜¥ì¥êÃÙÇæ¯ë±ä±Ù©ì¯Ý©ÜÃ˜¯á¥ì¨˜ÃÚ±Ù¯Û©ãÃ˜Çì±ç¨˜¯á«ìÃŸ¥ë¯˜¯ç¬êÃá¬ß¯á©æ«Ù¯ä«˜ÇÞ°ç¯ê¯å¯¦¥˜º [/code]

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19640473]Ok then, if its so useless, translate this back into it's original form. [code] »¯ç¯æ¿ßºê¯ÙÃÜ±íºä¯Ù©ì¨á«ç¿æ¿ë¬¤Ã˜¯ñ°ç¨í¿˜¯àºÙ°î¿Ý¯˜¥ì¥êÃÙÇæ¯ë±ä±Ù©ì¯Ý©ÜÃ˜¯á¥ì¨˜ÃÚ±Ù¯Û©ãÃ˜Çì±ç¨˜¯á«ìÃŸ¥ë¯˜¯ç¬êÃá¬ß¯á©æ«Ù¯ä«˜ÇÞ°ç¯ê¯å¯¦¥˜º [/code][/QUOTE] Be right back. [code] D:\Lua\my stuff\anthoni_decrypt>lua5.1 main.lua < data_encrypted.txt Congradulations, you have translated it back to it's original form. [/code] Here's the code: [lua] local decrypted = "" local other = true for c in function() return io.stdin:read(1) end do if other then decrypted = decrypted .. string.char(string.byte(c) - 120) end other = not other end print(decrypted)[/lua] It took me a while because I were trying it in Ruby at first. It only took me about 5 minutes when I switched to Lua, though. edit: And it's spelled "Congratulations". edit2: And it's "its", not "it's".

Where is the 'fucking owned' rating when you need it?

Ahahahahaha. Nice. How did you figure it out? Just curious.

Good Job, I admit defeat. To be fair though I had only used encryption a few times in the past, and I coded the application in a few minutes(minus the mw2 breaks). Maybe I'll make a better one. ;) (Using C++ and a some trig)

[QUOTE=Xama;19640794]Ahahahahaha. Nice. How did you figure it out? Just curious.[/QUOTE] Actually we started a code-off in #luahelp, it went something like this: [code] <jA_cOp> *posts link* It's a code-off! <blankthemuffin> Python, I choose you! <jA_cOp> Go, Ruby! <boided> gogo gadget C# *ten minutes later* <boided> "Congradulations,ɤyouɤhaveɤtranslatedɤitɤbackɤtoɤitĀsɤoriginalɤform.ɤ" <boided> besides some stupid unicode/multibyte char issues *five minutes later* <boided> "Congradulations, you have translated it back to it's original form. " <boided> i win <boided> cmon you're laggin behind <jA_cOp> Ruby, come back! <jA_cOp> Go, Lua! *another five minutes* <boided> cmon jA_cOp, post already <jA_cOp> posted [/code] For the actual reverse engineering, well, it's VB.NET, go figure. Not that it would make much of a difference if it were in C++ though, as both me and boided do assembly as well. [QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19640795]Good Job, I admit defeat. To be fair though I had only used encryption a few times in the past, and I coded the application in a few minutes(minus the mw2 breaks). Maybe I'll make a better one. ;) (Using C++ and a some trig)[/QUOTE] A key based decryption algorithm tends to... actually use the key. edit: boided is VoiDeD on the forums, by the way.

Oh don't worry I've already started designing the real cipher. There are variations to the encipher mathematical forms, which use trigonometry and matrix math, multiple shifts selected randomly, and multiple keys, and all that is just one character. In this next one... if you don't have the keys, you won't be reading it. [B]Edit: [/B]Well the shifts are not really shifts this time.

I'm really worried, rule number one of practical crypto is don't design your own cypher.

[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;19640948]I'm really worried, rule number one of practical crypto is don't design your own cypher.[/QUOTE] It is spelled "cipher", and I'll make my cipher how I want, I am smart enough to do so.

windwakr you're full of yourself.

Sure, you can do what you want, but don't pretend it's any good and certainly don't recommend its use. also latepost: [lua] for char in encrypted:gmatch("(.).") do decrypted = decrypted .. string.char(char:byte() - 120) end [/lua] Mine Pwnz Urs Ja_cOP

[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;19641023]Sure, you can do what you want, but don't pretend it's any good and certainly don't recommend its use. also latepost: [lua] for char in encrypted:gmatch("(.).") do decrypted = decrypted .. (char:byte() - 120):char() end [/lua] Mine Pwnz Urs Ja_cOP[/QUOTE] A little fast there - a number (the expression (char:byte() - 120)) doesn't contain the char function :) edit: There we go, and yeah, I'm not comfortable with pattern matching. I'll learn it properly one day, though.

We'll see blank.

[QUOTE=jA_cOp;19641027]A little fast there - a number (the expression (char:byte() - 120)) doesn't contain the char function :)[/QUOTE] ninja'd my edit damn you

[code]rOe6zìõ26+wlbD!ZÈSe(líëY6ü-cnìõ34i>ýTíùWtÒ>71íâX4iUÓríüÊBm>ûnìõ2y9MOSoãWs+wlbcÖ:ÈÌeûtêË_È+ìcjìõ#ÚTÿcKíú>6ö2cnfÛWÚÌeÔZÁÎZÈ+ìclÙÔWsöÿýjíäqrÛUûnÍÛWùiÁOSklasãÿïbzõX5DMýmíë2z+MBnÁÕW&öexHú-?rü>clÿÛY7Õ>.Líú#ÝÕeûtêËL7+AcDyãY7D;cvklcúËe[tôÕ?qÛ2BPÒGJôü2cPü!Y4CoýbcÕ16ÕêÚlÙÔWqö2Ó9ÒËH6SeAjôÖWsÒ>âbmãWqÛwxLêÎWr+wcnfõ0$jÌNLÝËHêüwtbv!0$iMBRÙ-?sKe6lÁÜ1ÀmscvklcúËeÀlÿÛY7Õ>.Líú#ÝÕeûtêËL7+Ec7ÙÔ2ÚjscDyãY7D;cvklcúË:NLÝËHô+wlbm!qrÛUûnÍÛWùiÁOSklarÛU7PóÕ;úÏMNHíö,zD>#boõXy+>.bz-HÚ+ccDtÖ0AöÿBHíä,4D2ûbzãWsüÿNRóËM6SscUÁÖ0ÈDg+boâ0ÚÒgN9úGIîHWOSaâÎ6öUNPêÜqrü;cDyãY7D;cvklcúËe[DêÃ1yÕU7PÌËM6Swxbm!Wr+>ïlêÔ0À+>7buÏX4jÿxtÙË_ÀSexHú-êrÛUûnÍÛWùiÁOSklarãEBnêõY4i0NLÝËHêÒÂ(jíýXÀT-cRÙãêt%MÓ5ÿ!X5HWNPúÖ#Ý+gcDôËHz+gxZäõXz+Uc9èËLyÕìïZÝ!W4iU(Díú#tDscUèõXÀ+gjbEÖ?söMïZê+êrã>ïlêÂ#ÚKeQuwffíj)NLÝGJûnwNZÙGIîHWOSaâËÚÒgûtùËI6ü-ýtëlfzD>Èbjõ#Úi>ïboÛ1Àö2xDÁ-WsöwxbbÛY7Ìeû7íâXyjEl6íâÖ6TÿcntÕZÀm>NPÚÔ3ÈmeûfèGJêÒMBTêÏqrOêÚuwhLÀSwczÙËK$ÕìïnìÛZz+wclÝ!1ÚjÿÃHÁË>4ioïfÝÖY7Õ2ctÉ!0Ûi:ÜLäÕ#ùiÁOSklarãMN9ÍËNz+wllÙÔWqãM.HäÂ1ÀÌeÔLúËHô+wlbuÕ0zCUcjìõ#ÈÌeûZìõWtÕw#beÔ0yi0N9äÂ:ÀÕeÔLúËM6SeûnùÛXÝn2ûZíö:ÚSeATôÏWrü>cDÙãX7nwtbuõ;4ÌêÚPÀÛ1Új>xbgö:yjÿÔPÿõY6mÿcjÿÛWqSUNHÁÖWqTìÓZíì3Úi>(LÝõ.z+wcZôÏWqö>ýbgëXÈnwxtêÊfíÒgûtÌËJBÕeBRÙÕ?smeûríâX4j2ïfíë2ÀmUcKíýH5+MÈnÙÖ?&öeZ9íä,6SÿûBíëWÚÌe7LíýH6ÌúOSoý0Ànÿc1Úã16CeÔLúËJBÕexXÁË>6öÿcDôËI6öwxLÁÔWtÒgâbfõ;yiUûNíúZÀmeANä!1Àü2OSm!WtnwxPÍÏX6SÿýbCóX4jEV9àËHy+U(7íä,Ú+gïtÙÖ.Àö-7Líï0ÚSeûjôÎ:Úöe(líýN7Õ>ÃuwjqqÛw.RÙÏX4jÌÓ9ûËJÀSe79ôÖ:ÚöÿûdíâZÚjÿNPöÎ17CexDÁÃ1z+wZPàËM6Swcnjã2Oi:xPìÃ0yKa[/code] I use it for sharing user-made stuff for a game I'm programming to protect space ship designs. Encryption increases the byte amount by about 14%

[QUOTE=ThePuska;19641242] I use it for sharing user-made stuff for a game I'm programming to protect space ship designs. Encryption increases the byte amount by about 14%[/QUOTE] cool 'protection' bro

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19640990]It is spelled "cipher", and I'll make my cipher how I want, I am smart enough to do so.[/QUOTE] Are you also going to get several mathematicians/cryptoanalysts to prove it's safe? Otherwise no one but you will use it. I'm not saying you shouldn't do it, but you certainly shouldn't rely on it, shouldn't recommend its use, and shouldn't claim it is secure until it has been proven.

I'll do plenty of tests, and get folks to test it. So far the formulas(that I have done) work out in theory but I still need to code and test them.

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19646204]I'll do plenty of tests, and get folks to test it. So far the formulas(that I have done) work out in theory but I still need to code and test them.[/QUOTE] I don't think you quite understand. There's a difference between getting a few of your mates to run your program, and having professional (or at least knowledgeable and experienced) analysts (emphasis on the plural here) proving its security.

I understand that. I was just saying It would be tested. Hell I'll let ya'll test it again.

[QUOTE=Anthoni_c;19646204]I'll do plenty of tests, and get folks to test it. So far the formulas(that I have done) work out in theory but I still need to code and test them.[/QUOTE] The SHA hash functions were designed by the National Security Agency in the States, even their SHA-0 hash has flaws in it.

Cool a whole 90 posts, and i would say about 5 were helpful. Anyone else even know what the question of the thread was without looking?

Yes, you were asking about password storage in your application. The point is you do it properly or don't do it at all when it comes to crypto. (or just about anything really)

[QUOTE=zman115;19654378]Cool a whole 90 posts, and i would say about 5 were helpful. Anyone else even know what the question of the thread was without looking?[/QUOTE] Read the link blank posted.