sha1

I would like to use a SecureString varible within VB.NET and convert that to a SHA1 or SHA512 hash. How would I securely convert the SecureString to the Byte array that HashAlgorithm.ComputeHash will accept? What about that, if we avoid the only used String instance (output) and replace it with a character array. This would enable us to wipe this array after use: public static String SecureStringToMD5( SecureString password ) { int passwordLength = password.Length; char[] passwordChars = new char[passwordLength]; // Copy the password from SecureString to our char array IntPtr passwortPointer =

I know what is a SHA and SHA1 cryptographic algorithm. I also know how to genarate these from a computer. But I have searched a lot on the internet and still unable to get a proper explanation on how using these keys will secure an API that you are using on an Android app? For example, Facebook needs your SHA1 key from your system along with your app's package name to be entered on their developer console and their API doesn't work on your app if the key you entered is wrong. How does this mechanism work? How do they verify this on your App? Facebook is leveraging Android application signing

I am working on a legacy ColdFusion MX7 site. They want to implement a "salted hash" password system. But some time in the next year or so they plan to build a completely new PHP site and don't want to have to reset (lose) all the passwords. So I'm looking for some code that will work on both platforms. I'm new to this, but as far as I can tell, the following two blocks of code should do the same thing. However, they produce different results. Anyone care to help? COLDFUSION CODE: <cffunction name="computeHash" access="public" returntype="String"> <cfargument name="password" type="string" />

I have an existing application that i published in to google play. All was fine, until I have changed a computer and my sha1 fingerprint changed. Is there a possible way to change the sha1 for an existing application in google play developer console? if not, how can I deal with it? Thank you! If you remember, when you publish the app first time on your older computer, you generate a key.keystore in order to sign the apk file and publish to google play. You need to have the same file. When you want to sign the apk, it asks if you want to generate a new key or use an existing key. Since you have

I wrote some code using the Microsoft CryptoAPI to calculate a SHA-1 and got the compiled exe working on Windows 7, Win Server 2008, Win Server 2003. However, when I run it under Windows XP SP3, it does not work. I narrowed down the failure to the CryptAcquireContext() call. I did notice that a previous post talked about the XP faulty naming of " … (Prototype) " and it must be accounted for by using a WinXP specific macro MS_ENH_RSA_AES_PROV_XP. I did the XP specific code modifications and it still doesn't work. (The bResult returns 0 false on Win XP, all other platforms bResult returns 1 true

Is it possible to optimise the function: MD5_Update(&ctx_d, buf, num); if you know that buf contains only zeros? Or is this mathematically impossible? Likewise for SHA1. If you control the input of the hash function then you could use a simple count instead of all the zero's, maybe using some kind of escape. E.g. 000020 in hex could mean 32 zero's. A (very) basic compression function may be much faster than MD5 or SHA1. Obviously this solution will only be faster if you save one or more blocks of hash calculations. E.g. it does not matter if you hash 3 bytes or 16 bytes, as the input will be

i am asking myself if it would be dangerous on a asp.net page´s codebehind to use an static (Shared) variable which holds an HMACSHA1-instance. the problem is that the same HMACSHA1-instance would be used by all the asp.net worker-process´ threads when processing multiple simultaneous requests on the same asp.net-page. all (HMACSHA1)instance- and ComputeHash()-method variables which are used/modified by ComputeHash() would be shared (= could be modified) by all the threads?! is that assumption correct? as a result the return value of ComputeHash would not be guaranteed to be correct?!?! thus i