Gizmo's Freeware is Recruiting
We are currently looking for people with skills and/or interest in the following areas:
- Rootkit Scanner and Remover
- Web Browser for Android
If this sounds like you then click here for more details
Best Free Hash Utility
|
In a Hurry?
|
|
|
|
Introduction
|
|
This software category is in need of an editor. If you are interested in taking it over then check out this page for more details. You can then contact us from that page or by clicking here. Hashing is the process of computing a fixed-length string (called a "message digest") from a data stream usually for the purpose of validating, authenticating, or digitally signing that stream. The stream could be a disk file, an email message, or packets of data in network transport. Hashing is not encryption because the message digest cannot readily be transformed back into the original data from which it was computed. Instead, hashing is a mechanism for representing a block of data in a predictable way by the use of a standard, public algorithm. The usefulness of hashing arises partly from the ease with which message digests can be computed and partly from the fact that no two data streams should ever produce the same message digest. These characteristics suggest some important uses to which hashing algorithms can be put. Digitally signing an email message, for example, involves computing a cryptographic hash of the body of the message and all attachments that is then encrypted using the sender's private key. (Note: It is the hash that is encrypted and not the message itself when the message is only digitally signed and not encrypted. When the entire message is encrypted, the recipient's public key is used to do so.) The encrypted hash is then attached to the message for transport. On the receiving end, the digital signature accompanying the message is decrypted using the sender's public key, which could have accompanied the message or could have been drawn from a key escrow, and the resulting data, which was the original hash of the message body with attachments, is compared against a newly computed hash of the received message data. If the original hash and the newly computed one are identical, then there is a high degree of probability that the message was not altered in transit and that it did come from the person whose digital signature accompanied the message. Another important use for cryptographic hashes is in the verification of an acquired data stream against a published hash for that stream. For example, individuals, companies, and organizations often provide file download services on web sites and in online databases. In addition to offering content in the form of downloadable files, hashes of those files are often published that the consumer can validate the downloaded content against. If the consumer's own computation of the hash of the content using his or her own tool, which can be different from the tool used by the content provider, is identical to the published hash, then there is a high degree of probability that the downloaded content is identical to the published data. This is useful for ensuring that the received file is what was published both from the standpoint of malicious alteration and from the standpoint of accidental alteration or truncation in transit, which is much more likely. What the hash verification does not do is validate that the acquired data stream is harmless. Because of the ease with which hashes can be computed, malicious web site owner's can publish hashes for infected content. Even "dear john" letters, which might be far from harmless to the recipient, can be digitally signed for email transport. The hashing involved in either case says nothing whatsoever about the nature of the content provided. Unsuspecting consumers might infer trust in the content from the existence of the published hash or digital signature when in fact all the hash can do is facilitate validation that the content received matches the content published. Trust in the content itself must be derived from other knowledge that the consumer/recipient possesses about the publisher/sender. |
|
Technical Discussion
|
|
For those who are interested in knowing more about the various hashing algorithms in use, a technical discussion of these algorithms and their possible uses follows. There are several hashing algorithms in common use having different purposes and varying degrees of reliability for error detection, data validation, and cryptographic security. Common algorithms include Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC), Message Digest (MD), Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA), RACE Integrity Primitives Evaluation Message Digest (RIPEMD), and Whirlpool. Virtually all algorithms have gone through revisions or replacements to improve their inherent security (SHA-2, for example, being more cryptographically secure than SHA-1, and the final version of Whirlpool more than earlier versions). In addition, some algorithms, such as SHA and RIPEMD, offer variations that reduce the likelihood of accidental collisions (two messages having the same hash). SHA-512, for example, is SHA-2 with a 512 bit (64 byte) message digest size that reduces the likelihood of accidental collisions versus SHA-256, but a larger digest size does not make an otherwise identical hash algorithm more secure. The larger digest sizes satisfy the needs of encryption algorithms that require them. The security of a hashing algorithm, however, is defined by its resistance to certain kinds of attacks such as pre-image attacks and deliberate collision attacks irrespective of its digest size. (Digest size merely refers to the number of bits in the hash produced by the algorithm.) CRC is a high-performance algorithm that can be implemented in hardware for the validation of data moving through the electronics of a computer or network device at high speed. Its purpose is to provide maximum performance in the detection of errors in the data stream. CRC is not suitable for cryptographic use because of its low collision resistance, but it does provide basic error checking when performance is paramount. The widely-used MD5 algorithm is the latest of a serious of algorithms in the same family. It produces a 128 bit message digest. It has been shown, however, that MD5 is not collision resistant. In 2007, two Danish researchers demonstrated that it is possible for two executable programs, one benign and the other not, to share the same MD5 message digest. It would be difficult for malicious coders to exploit the researchers' methodology because it would require the coders to insinuate themselves into the publication of the original program, but it is difficult to be sure that this could not lead to a practical attack vector. The researchers' conclusion was that MD5 ought not be used for code signing and cryptographic purposes. SHA was created by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States Government, and it has been used as a general purpose algorithm for cryptographic applications since the mid-1990s. (Although hashing algorithms are not reversible encryption systems, they are used by such systems for various purposes.) Weaknesses in early versions, SHA-0 and SHA-1, led to the creation of SHA-2. (SHA-256 and SHA-512 are both SHA-2 algorithms with differing message digest sizes.) A public competition for a successor to SHA-2, which will become SHA-3, is currently being conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Among the current SHA algorithms, SHA-256 provides a good compromise between performance and security having no known collision vectors. One of the chief criticisms of SHA-1 and 2, however, has been that their development was conducted by a secret governmental agency. Unlike SHA, RIPEMD was created by an open academic community--the COSIC group of Belgium's Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, which is the same group whose Rijndael encryption algorithm won the competition for the U.S. Government's Advanced Encryption Standard in 2001. RIPEMD comes in two versions, RIPEMD-128 (the faster) and RIPEMD-160 (the more secure) each of which has an extension for a larger hash result size (256 and 320 bits respectively). RIPEMD creators caution that the larger hash result sizes of the extensions should not be regarded as more secure than the base algorithms and are merely provided for applications that require larger message digests. The Whirlpool hash algorithm was created by one of the co-creators, Vincent Rijmen, of the Rijndael encryption system that became the Advanced Encryption Standard. Whirlpool is actually based on Rijndael with certain key differences that make it a one-way hashing algorithm instead of a reversible encryption system. Whirlpool, which has a fixed message digest size of 512 bits, has been revised twice to deal with weaknesses found in early versions. These versions are referred to as Whirlpool-0, Whirlpool-T, and then just Whirlpool for the final published version. All implementations are expected to use the final version. Programs that use any of these algorithms for file validation purposes ought to at least compute MD5 and SHA-1 hashes as these are the most widely used by software publishers. If both are used, the effects of their respective weaknesses can be canceled because it is extremely unlikely that a given malicious file could simultaneously exploit the weaknesses of both. For non-cryptographic purposes, this would be sufficient. Good supplemental algorithms to these would be SHA-256 and Whirlpool as these currently have no known weaknesses. The inclusion of other algorithms does not necessarily make a given program better. There are some differences in the algorithms used by the various programs reviewed here. The various versions of SHA and RIPEMD and the latest version of Whirlpool are included in the International Standards Organization (ISO) standard 10118-3:2004 for dedicated hash functions. |
|
Product Reviews
|
|
Focusing on the use of hashing for the validation of a data stream against published hashes, there are a number of useful programs that provide this functionality. Essentially, these programs 1) must be easy to use, 2) must accurately compute hashes according to published algorithms, and 3) must present the information in a usable form. It is not important whether hashing is the primary purpose of the software or just an incidental feature of a broader application. What is important is that a useful capability is provided attended with as little "noise" (bugs and fluff) as possible. The programs reviewed here provide three levels of functionality:
The reviewed applications implement their user interfaces in one of three ways:
It cannot really be said that any one of these approaches is better than the others because each provides its own capabilities. A console application, for example, allows for scripting and ad-hoc programming that is not possible with graphical applications, but its user interface is somewhat limited. A Windows Explorer context menu entry provides quick access to a full-scale application, but this also switches the user to a new application context. An Explorer property page tab offers a handy and familiar access to program controls without context switching, but the small physical window size places constraints on application features.
The bottom zone of the tab panel provides the hash comparison feature. A hash can be pasted into the Hash Comparison field, and it will be automatically compared against the selected hashes. If a match is found, a green checkmark is displayed below the field along with the name of the hash that was matched. If no match is found, a red "x" is shown. You should be sure that the desired hash is selected before concluding that there is a mismatch because the program does not report whether it matches an unselected algorithm. The comparison zone also provides a button that can be used to select a file to compare the current file against. On clicking the button, a dialog is presented that permits the user to browse to the desired file. The program remembers the last location the Open dialog was used to access, and subsequent dialog sessions return to that location, which may have been from a previous program session. When comparing a hash that is pasted in, the one that matches is the one used, but when comparing another file, the first algorithm that matches in the alphabetically-sorted list is used. If you want to use a specific hash, you have to change the selected hashes in Options by removing all hashes from the list that alphabetically precede the desired algorithm. After so doing, you will have to reselect the file to compare because the Hash Comparison field will be blanked out on returning to the tab panel. HashMyFiles is a full-scale Windows application that can be launched directly, or from the Explorer context menu when that feature is enabled. HashMyFiles not only computes hashes of files and compares them against each other or against any MD5 or SHA-1 hash that is in the Windows clipboard, but it can also hash all files in a file system identifying hash duplicates in the process. The program can compute hashes for a single file, a group of files, or an entire file system, but it only does so using CRC, MD5, and SHA-1. The main program window provides a list of the files selected for hashing, and the hashes are computed automatically. If a file in the list matches an MD5 or SHA-1 hash that has been copied to the clipboard, that file is highlighted. If there are multiple hashes for multiple files in the clipboard, all matches are highlighted. In addition, files in the list that are duplicates of each other are similarly labeled and highlighted. The program can hook into the Windows Explorer context menu by enabling an option to do so. (It is disabled by default.) When enabled, right-clicking the selected files or folders and selecting HashMyFiles in the context menu will bring up the program with the file hashes computed and matches highlighted. Selecting a large number of files, or the base folder of a large tree, can result in a lengthy delay while the hashes are calculated. This program can be configured to operate from the Windows system tray. Closing the program with this feature enabled--it is disabled by default--will allow quick access to the program window for further use. Selecting another file to hash will restore the program window with the newly selected file and computed hashes added to the bottom of the list. The NirSoft site for HashMyFiles reports support for all Windows versions since and including 2000. The program has a faulty interaction, however, with a security feature of Windows 7, and as the feature also exists in Windows Vista, presumably with it as well. One of the more recent capabilities of Windows is to keep track of the origin of individual files and request approval to open files that came from an untrusted source (e.g., the internet). Sometimes, this causes HashMyFiles to launch multiple windows with the various selected files distributed among them or to open one window with multiple entries of the selected files present and marked as duplicates. Another problem with the program is the low-contrast highlighting used to identify matched entries. On some monitors, the low-contrast is difficult to distinguish at some visual angles and virtually disappears at others. HashCheck Shell Extension is an open source program that employs a Windows property page tab as its user interface. It computes hashes using CRC, MD4, MD5, and SHA-1, and it can work on single files, multiple files, and whole file systems. The program window has a text field for displaying computed hashes and a field for pasting in a hash to match. The program can save the computed hashes to a text file in various encodings that it can later use to re-validate the included files. HashCheck is a sort of hybrid of HashTab and FCIV. It performs the basic single file hash computing and comparing functionality as other programs. To validate a single file, right-click on the file in Windows Explorer and select Properties. Click the Checksums tab to display the hashes for the selected file. Paste the published hash into the field at the bottom of the tab window, and the program will automatically highlight the matching hash or show a text bubble indicating that the hash was not found in the list. If multiple files had been selected, hashes for all files will be computed and displayed. If a large number of files were selected, or the base folder of a large file system, it may take a long time to compute all the hashes. A convenient progress bar shows the programs progress computing the hashes, and unlike progress bars in some programs including those in software of large companies such as Microsoft and Oracle, the progress bar is accurate reaching the end only when it is actually completed computing hashes. There are two progress bars--one for the overall process and one for the individual files. Very large files can take a minute to hash. The program goes beyond most others reviewed here in that its results can be saved to a text file for later revalidation. To do this, click the Save button at the bottom of the program window. In the Save As dialog that appears, enter a file name (the program computes a default), a file type, and click Save. The dialog opens in the location that contains the selected file(s) and/or folder(s), so you may want to browse to a different location to save the file. The program chooses which hash to save for the listed file(s) in the file based on the file type selected in the Save As dialog. It saves only one hash type in a given file, and the saved file takes an extension that is consistent with its type. To re-validate the files that were included in the saved hash file, just double-click on the saved hash file to launch a HashCheck window that will proceed to recompute the hashes for the files and indicate the matches, mismatches, and unreadables--the latter category usually indicating a missing file. HashCheck has many useful features, but it could be improved. Dropping the CRC and MD4 algorithms, which are not really needed for a program like this, and replacing them with SHA-256 and Whirlpool would be a big improvement. A reporting tool would be useful as well. It would be nice if the program could save its data into a single file containing all hashes computed for each file. As it is, a separate file is required to save the hashes for a given algorithm. Like HashTab and HashCheck, Febooti fileTweak Hash & CRC works as a tab on the file property page. To compute the hash of a file, you right-click the file, select Properties, and then click the tab labeled "Hash / CRC". The upper portion of the tab panel shows the name of the file being hashed, if just one had been selected, or a count of the total number selected. It also shows the file system location of the selected file(s), although a deep location will be truncated. The middle portion of the panel lists the available hashes which can be easily selected or excluded using a checkbox next to each one. Two of the algorithms, MD and RIPEMD, have drop-downs to the left that allow you to select the version of the algorithm to use in the main list. The algorithms that are selected when the program starts, which are remembered from the last session, are automatically computed for the selected file. If an algorithm is added, you must click the Compute button in the lower section to recompute the hashes to include the newly selected one. The lower portion of the tab panel provides a mechanism for switching the file to use when multiple files were selected in Windows Explorer. To compute hashes for a different file from a group, just click the View file drop-down, select the desired file from the list, and click Compute. Unlike the other programs reviewed here, Febooti Hash & CRC, does not provide a hash comparison feature. There is no way to directly compare the hash of a file against published hash or against the hash of another file. To compare the computed hash against a published hash, you must click the Copy button, select which hash (or all) to place on the clipboard, paste the hash(es) into another window such as an empty Notepad document, paste the published hash into the same window, and then visually compare them. If you need to compare two files, you have to go through this exercise for each file before comparing them. The program does, at least, make it easy to get the computed hashes onto the clipboard. Microsoft File Checksum Integrity Verifier (FCIV) is a console application, which means that it only runs inside a command window. You might wonder why such a program would be considered here, but there is a unique capability provided by this program that is worth a look. For computing the hash of a single file, this would not be the tool to use, but it can be used to create a database of hashes for many files, including recursively through an entire file system, and then later use that database to re-validate those same files.
FCIV only computes hashes using the MD5 and SHA-1 algorithms. The purpose of this program is to provide a method by which large numbers of files can be validated very quickly thus exposing unauthorized modifications. The following command can be used to generate a database of hashes for all ".exe" and ".dll" files below C:\Program Files using both MD5 and SHA-1:
fciv "c:\program files" -xml c:\temp\pf.xml -r -both -type .exe -type .dll
If you leave out the type argument(s), it will compute hashes for all files that it finds. The following command can be used to validate the database against the same files at a later time:
fciv -v -both -xml c:\temp\pf.xml
The program will report any differences that it finds. It does not report the presence of new files, but it does report any files of the original set that are missing. The setup of the program is entirely manual. After extracting it from the download, the program must be copied to a location that is in the command path or its extracted folder must be added to the path. Once this is done, it can be executed from any command window. To get help information about the program, type "fciv -h". The help information includes examples, but there are some differences between the information provided and the way the program actually behaves.
|
|
Others
|
|
Here are some more hash programs. I haven't downloaded them yet, but here's the info I got off their websites.
|
No software installation program. Just download and run.
No software installation program. Just download and run.
|
Editor
|
|
This software category is in need of an editor. If you are interested in taking it over then check out this page for more details. You can then contact us from that page or by clicking here. |
Back to the top of the article.
- Article type:

Comments
Please note that I have already tried
one listed in the comments on page two.
Century22 on 20. August 2009:
"WinMD5Sum Portable"
"System Requirements: Windows 95/98/Me/2000/XP/Vista"
I tried the current one (V1.0.1.55 Rev-3),
it will not even launch in Win-ME at all,
and there doesn't seem to be a way to get
older archived version from the website.
http://www.nullriver.com/products/winmd5sum
They are:
"working on improving this portion of our web site."
Opus,
I am being listed as "Not verified" here,
was I supposed to get a validation email?
I have not received one yet, resend please ?
Thank you in advance,
We The People
I have a handful of 9x-kernel kiosk boards
that I use for lengthy automated projects.
Hashing terabyte-sized USB-3.0 external portable
"DriveBooks" could be one of those tasks for them.
They use Win-ME embedded, so they are stripped of many of the
horrid (automated) funtionality that plaqued that OS back then,
and they run from ROM, so they are clean every reboot...
Does anyone know of a utility that works
in a win-9x enviroment instead please ?
Very nice wotk BTW Opus ! :)
.
Just installed Hash tab and its options are quite nice.
After installation, it shows up in the windows explorer right click properties menu of each file. You can choose whatever hashes you want too (md5, sha, etc..) and can also copy/paste the hashes.
To test out the hash functionality, I downloaded the sandboxie installer and verified the hashes (http://www.sandboxie.com/index.php?AllVersions) with my downloaded version and it worked fine.
Igorware hasher is also pretty good due to its file size and as a portable application.
Just found/tried out and definitely worth looking at:
http://www.igorware.com/hasher
-portable
-free
-32bit/64bt
-generate md5/sha1/crc32
-compare md5/sha1/crc32
-supports drag and drop
(just launch, drag drop any file into the 'browse' box and
click on calculate)
-automatically loads verification files when found
and eh ... just: 92,0kB !
Many thank you for this really good review!
Frankly, I have spent a lot of time trying to find the suitable utility and actually I haven't found it sofar.
It should be :
-free
-very simple
-portable
I only use it to compare downloaded files with MD5 and SHA-1 checksums from clipboard.
So, I download a file, copy the MD5 or SHA-1 checksum to clipboard, then run the utility and it shd compare the checksum.
The most ideal situation would be that it could do this from the command-line. This would enable me to create a context menu item within my Explorer.
Any suggestions?
Thank you!
p.s.: Maybe the review, though already great and very much appreciate, could summarize product-features, like: portable, free, generate checksums, compare checksums.
It is just an idea.
I have written one in Microsoft C++ for MD5. It's free for you to use at your own risk. It's called MD5Hash. You may download here:
http://www.favessoft.com/
It includes both native 32 bit and 64 bit versions. Also included are utilities to add and remove entries to the Explorer context menu for both files and folder. It's not the slickest. It only does MD5. But I will say this, I've right clicked and drag & dropped folders of 4000 files and files over 4 GB and it hasn't crapped out on me. So I would describe it as "robust."
I notice many MD5 programs have a facility to line up the computed MD5 with one from a file so you can look at all the characters in the sum. This is really a waste of effort as MD5 is designed so that a small change in the input produces a drastic change in the result. I find looking at the first 4 characters is all that's required.
Try this one in Java. There is also a Windows integration interface which makes JackSum available in the "Send To..." menu item. Jacksum supports 58 popular standard hash algorithms.
http://www.jonelo.de/java/jacksum/
And for file validation, try this free service which uses MD5 and SHA1 hash codes:
http://fileadvisor.bit9.com/services/search.aspx
bit9 is a white/blacklist company.
Really nobody have stumbled with File Verfier ++ it´s so far the most comprehensive & powerful hash utility I´ve stumbled with, it includes installer and non-install versions and it´s open-source.
http://www.programmingunlimited.net/siteexec/content.cgi?page=fv
http://sourceforge.net/projects/fileverifier/
I haven't used a lot of utilities like this. What I don't see described in FileVerifier++ help, is once you load a file, select an algorithm & calculate the hash, how do you get the known good hash into the prgm to verify against calculated one (copy / paste or from a saved file, etc.)
I d/l copy of Tbird 6. Pointed FV++ to it - fine. Selected SHA1, then calculate.
I'd also just copied to clipboard, the published SHA1 off Mozilla's public d/l site w/ hashes:
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/thunderbird/releases/6.0.2/S...
After calculating the SHA1 hash in VF++, R clicked the file / path in UI, & "verify." I don't know if this is the "usual" way to do it, but VF++ changed the Verification col. entry to "Valid," & turned the line green.
I'm not sure what it ACTUALLY did, or if that's the easiest way to verify one file.
I have been using CDCheck for years. It creates a file, which can be compared, and can create a report, including CSV. It handles MD2, MD4, MD5, CRC-32 (as used by various zip programs), Adler32, Gost32, Haval128 to Haval 256, SHA1 to SHA512, Tiger128 to Tiger 192, RIPEMD128 to RIPEMD160. I use CRC-32, as it can easily be compared with values in PKZip and WinRAR.
This program may not be in the same league as the ones above, but it has highlighted drive problems for me, where i have copied files, compared them, and found problems.
It can be downloaded here:
http://kvipu.com/CDCheck/
Kind regards,
Shuf
Agreed, another program that I've found invaluable over a LOT of years. Whenever I make a copy, I'll run cdcheck just to make sure everything worked ok.
I've used hasher from den4b seems like forever. Yes, it only does a file at a time, but that's mainly what I use it for - to verify a download, or to compare 2 files. I like the fact you can either paste in a hash from the clipboard, or compare 2 files with a simple check box (compare to next file). It has MD5, SHA1, CRC32, ELF, and SUM64 (I've only ever used the 1st 2).
http://www.den4b.com/downloads.php?project=Hasher
Moderators comment:
Although green rated by WOT, Norton Safe Web indicates this website as infected.
http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=www.den4b.com
This is likely just because of the components available from it, but please be advised.
Understand about the warning, I've seen it. It comes from another program there, hooker, which is a keyboard spy (explictly stated).
But hasher and renamer both pass a specific Norton anti-virus check.
I use the totally-free-for-any-use Kana Checksum from http://www.kanasolution.com/index.php?fid=7 -- Explorer extension, MD5 and CRC only, unfortunately no SHAxxx checksums, but it auto-loads the MD5 sum for comparison from [filename].md5 if it exists in the same folder, or you can paste the MD5 in yourself.
I just noticed that I was not logged in when posting my comments this morning. My apologies.
Kind regards,
Opus
There are a large number of hashing programs available--too many to post thorough reviews here for all. Here is a list of programs not yet reviewed that have been suggested here or that I have run across:
Hashcheck: http://code.kliu.org/hashcheck
Hasher: http://www.karenware.com/powertools/pthasher.asp
FSUM: http://www.slavasoft.com/fsum
WinMD5: http://www.blisstonia.com/software/WinMD5
WinHasher: http://www.gpf-comics.com/dl/winhasher
FlyingBit: http://www.flyingbit.com/products/hash_calculator
Crypto Hash Calculator: http://www.pendriveapps.com/crypto-hash-calculator
HashCalc: http://www.slavasoft.com/hashcalc
DigestIt: http://www.colonywest.us
MD5Summer: http://www.md5summer.org
XCSC: http://www.irnis.net/soft/xcsc
XCSV: http://www.irnis.net/soft/xcsv
WinMD5Sum: http://portableapps.com/apps/utilities/winmd5sum_portable
Checksum: http://corz.org/windows/software/checksum
Gizmo Hasher: http://arainia.com/software/gizmo/overview.php?nID=10
Nero MD5-Checksum: http://www.nero.com/eng/tools-utilities.html
RapidCRC: http://rapidcrc.sourceforge.net
Easy Hash: http://ziin.pl/en/easy_hash
ExactFile: http://www.exactfile.com
ILSV: http://www.cdtag.com/ilsfv
What I am going to do is look at as many as I can and identify the very best. Reviews of these will be published here. Other programs that do not make the top list will get brief blurbs that will include the reason they did not make the cut.
Kind regards,
Opus
thanks Opus...
even just a listing would be great because then we will at least know that the editor is aware of the program and has decided it wasn't Top 5 or so...
...if he's reviewed it! as he says, he will look at as many as poss.
Nice list Opus.
I figured I would add that there are 2 more tools worth considering though they may fall into a slightly different category.
If a GUI is wanted, check out ExactFile - http://www.exactfile.com/
...I really like this one, clean interface, many features, and don't be fooled by the 'beta' label, this guy is a programmer by trade and ExactFile is something he does on the side. He has plans to enhance the tool and is open to ideas. The program is very stable.
...If you miss a stable HKSFV there is a 'tribute' app (their words, not mine) that seems promising, the app was updated in December 2009 or is it July - (2009-12-07), anyway if interested have a look.
ilSFV - http://www.cdtag.com/ilsfv/
Mike
I have added these to the list. There do seem to be a great many programs to look at. I want to try all that I can to find the best ones and those worth mention. ExactFile is interesting. I like the feature of creating a TestFile Applet to revalidate hashes. It does not appear to be able to compare a single hash against a file, but it does have functionality similar to HashCheck and FCIV for validating files against a database of hashes previously created.
Kind regards,
Opus
wow, that is by far the best writeup i've seen for any section on here, Opus...a professional article worthy of PC World or PC Magazine...
the only addition i would like to see to all of these categories on here is a listing of the freeware that didn't make the Top 5 but that might be worthy of a mention anyway...i think there are another 10 or so in this category that are worth listing and its also worth mentioning that the editor has noticed and considered them...people are not always looking for the same thing in a freeware program...
Thanks for the kind words about the article. It so happens that technical writing is part of my duties as a professional Windows/UNIX system administrator and Oracle database administrator, so I have a great deal of experience with this sort of thing.
Kind regards,
Opus
I agree and am working on this very thing. I have been evaluating HashCheck for inclusion, and there are several others on my list.
Kind regards,
Opus
For several years I've used Hasher from
http://www.karenware.com/powertools/pthasher.asp
chesscanoe
I have added Hasher to my list. Thanks for the recommendation.
Kind regards,
Opus
I like SlavaSoft's command line FSUM. Fsum can generate/verify hashes/checksums simultaneously. Great for using in batch files for automation, IMO.
Also like, HashCheck which adds a tab to the properties context menu, too.
binaryweasel
I am using an USB-HDD to collect all my software treasures. Meanwhile there are sitting > 350.000 files on it. For several years I used MD5SUMMER because it is intuitive, operates recursively on large directory trees and it is reliable. Worth a recommendation. Sadly, it is quite slow compared to other tools (on average 3 times slower), probably because of the GUI showing the progress when calculating on all these files. Even more sadly, it has reached its limits in my situation: it crashes on saving the MD5-file (> 42 MB) stating "out of memory".
I evaluated FSUM because it has nearly the same feature set. On a mentionable amount of files (approx. 50) during checksumming it fails and claims "access denied" to these files. This behaviour is consistent (occuring on every run), but irreproducible (different files, no correlation to size, type, or whatever). No antivirus software or other intervening software installed which may cause this. Contacted SlavaSoft and described the problem. No response.
Having said this, I do not recommend FSUM because it is unreliable. What a pity, since it looked as the perfect checksummer for my requirements.
Still looking for an alternative.
Thanks for the recommendation. This is a very interesting utility to compare against the functionality of FCIV.
Kind regards,
Opus
WinMD5 - not to be confused with the earlier WinMD5Sum. It is the only hash calculator I have ever seen that seems to be written by someone with a fully functioning brain; before I encountered it, I very nearly started writing one myself.
http://www.blisstonia.com/software/WinMD5/
It is *absurd* to put a hash calculator in a Property page! If you are calculating the hash of a 4 GB file, that usually means you are going to be sitting there staring at a seemingly *frozen* Properties window that gives you no indication of how far along the calculation is, how much longer it is going to take, and that you can't get rid of unless you kill Explorer!
And, as previously suggested, visually validating hashes is ridiculous! Even worse is trying to persuade a program to read in hashes from a text file that might not be using a standardized format, or at least not one sufficiently standardized to be instantly recognized by the program.
Hence the sublime beauty of WinMD5. You drag and drop files on top of it; if one of them is an MD5 digest, it logs the hashes accordingly. And if you drag and drop a bunch of files, you actually get a progress bar suggesting how much longer the calculation is going to take.
Every hash calculator should have been written this way.
You're badly misinformed, my friend. The Property sheet doesn't freeze while HashTab calculates, you can switch between Property sheet tabs while it calculates, and cancel the calculation or close the Property sheet as you choose. And of course, HashTab *does* include a progress bar - I'm surprised that you overlooked it. (But then, I'm surprised that you'd describe a hash utility as sublimely beautiful.) Finally, each Property page runs in its own thread. if you have to restart the shell to get rid of *any* Property page, you're infected.
The Property sheet is a wonderful place to tuck a seldom-used utility that I most often use with only one, or maybe two, files at a time. I always know where to find it, and it doesn't clutter the context menus. Then again, I'm not strongly partisan about file utilities. I do though regularly use two different hash utilities for different purposes, and you can not be more wrong to say that "every hash calculator should have been written this way," no matter what its advantages. Then again, I like to have a knife and spoon next to my fork at table.
Opus, I think you're mistaken about comparing files. Once HashTab has calculated hashes for the first file, click to select the hash that you want to use for comparison, then open the file you want to compare. Although it seems reasonable that you should be able to click any of the hashes *after* comparison to get the corresponding hash for the second file, it doesn't work that way, so it probably does deserve a "sad face" on that account.
There are in fact at least two de facto hash file formats, one for CRC and one for MD5. RapidCRC, which I use for its speed when calculating hashes for archived files, can write both formats. Although it warns about possible incompatibilities if (relative) path information is included, I've not yet found a hash utility that was confused by it. That may seem a bit limiting, but then I worry more about the effect of sunlight on optical media than about rogue MI5 agents secretly changing my MP3s, so MD5 spans a large enough space for my needs.
Post new comment