# Hash Un-hashing

The basic goal of this challenge is to exploit the high probability of collision in the Java Hash function to create a list of plausible inputs that created an outputted hash. The program that can print the most results in one hour wins.

For example, hashing golf produces the number 3178594. Other 'words' you could hash to get the same number would be: hQNG, hQMf, hPlf

## Details

The basic Java hash function is defined as:

function hash(text){
h = 0;
for(i : text) {
h = 31*h + toCharCode(i);
}
return h;
}


You can use an altered or more efficient variant of the hash function (such as using bitwise to replace multiplication) if it produces the same results.

If your language of choice does not use signed ints or have integer overflow, you must implement a wrap function in the hash to emulate integer overflow so that 2147483648 would overflow to -2147483648.

You can choose not to worry about inputs that wrap around multiple times, such as those with 6-7 characters or more. If you choose to include those, you have a better chance of winning.

• Your code should have at least one input: the hash itself. An optional second input is the maximum number of letters to guess. For example, guessHash(53134) might produce a list of all input combinations up to the absolute maximum amount (see the next requirement), and guessHash(53134, 4) will display all input combinations that contain 1-4 letters.

• As there are an infinite amount of results, the most letters that can be in a single result will be set at 256. If your program can manage to output all 256 letter results in a reasonable amount of time (see next requirement), you automatically win.

• Your program should not run for more than an hour on any non-specialized computer you use. Non-specialized means it can't run on a server system using 256 different cores or on a super-computer, it must be something that any regular consumer would/could buy. The shorter time period is for practicality, so that you don't have to use all your processing power for too long.

• All the results in your final list of inputs must produce the same hash as the inputted hash.

• You are to implement your own search, brute-force, or any algorithm to produce the final list.

• Using a native search method or search method from another library is not allowed (example: binary search library). Using String.search(char) or Array.find(value) is okay if it is not a primary feature of your search algorithm (such as to spot duplicate results or find if a letter exists in given string).

• The final list of input values should use all readable ASCII characters (32 to 126).

## Example

I went ahead and created a very inefficient version of this challenge to produce an example list! Each result I gave is separated by spaces, although you can print each result on a new line or any other readable method of organization.

i30( i3/G i2NG hQNG hQMf hPlf golf


You do not have to print results to a file, just record how many results you get.

## Judging

The number to un-hash is: 69066349

I will pick the best answer based on which-ever code produces the most results. If you remember above where I said wrapping was optional, it'd be a good idea to include multiple wrappings if you want the most results in your final list.

Good Luck!

• Great trolling: state that the question is about "Java" and then provide a JavaScript code snippet. – feersum Sep 25 '14 at 3:46
• You say "this code golf" but the judging is not by character count? – xnor Sep 25 '14 at 3:47
• Also the question states that characters should be ASCII, but provides a list including many non-ASCII characters. It appears Latin-1 instead of ASCII was desired. – feersum Sep 25 '14 at 3:49
• I don't think you have to worry about a program finding all preimages. With 256 characters out of a pool of 155, each with a probability of 2**-64 of matching the given hash (to give a rough estimate), there are 155**256/2**64 preimages. – Dennis Sep 25 '14 at 4:04
• That's 28773653479426574679752045985983708651314241076486969565840047647896492733218091801018247637865462591153254380909630939358483142387095514874963147201793135934206287462851566531896641573510502833532739091940091000563990339507011267238877057288024527221865244498474278775782301655262770952804980910234712459807545306017935605110278792039014148511645685233861391147234783503715268543704093987748985203419178705457137415361429762778270019610641592268726043290782629279945031794639464412329913307721831669515436033160513633497782473587351945837412 preimages. – Dennis Sep 25 '14 at 4:05

# C, 3.2 × 1010 preimages

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char output[29] = { 0 }, preimages[64][8], zeros[512][8] = { "/*$+06(" }; unsigned i, j, k, l, t; t = atoi(argv[1]); for(i = 7; i --> 0; t /= 31) preimages[0][i] = zeros[0][i] + (t % 31); for(i = 0, j = 2, k = 1; i < 6; i += 1, j *= 2) for(l = 0; k < j; k++, l++) strcpy(preimages[k], preimages[l]), preimages[k][i] -= 1, preimages[k][i + 1] += 31; for(i = 0, j = 3, k = 1; i < 6; i += 1, j *= 3) for(l = 0; k < j && k < 512; k++, l++) strcpy(zeros[k],zeros[l%(j/3)]), t = 1 + (l/(j/3)), zeros[k][i] -= t, zeros[k][i + 1] += 31 * t; for(i = 0, k = 0; i < (1L << 36); i++) { strcpy(&output[0], zeros[(i >> 27) & 511]); strcpy(&output[7], zeros[(i >> 18) & 511]); strcpy(&output[14], zeros[(i >> 9) & 511]); strcpy(&output[21], zeros[(i >> 0) & 511]); for(j = 0; j < 64; j += 4) { // k += 4; // if(k++ % 1000000 == 0) printf("%d\n", k); printf("%s%s\n%s%s\n%s%s\n%s%s\n", output, preimages[j + 0], output, preimages[j + 1], output, preimages[j + 2], output, preimages[j + 3] ); } } return 0; }  Calculates a preimage and adds and prefixes strings with hash 0. The time spent to generate the preimages should be negligible; all the code has to do is piece together five strings. That means that most of the time will be spent printing the results. In one hour, only 3.2 × 1010 preimages can be printed. If I comment the printf statement out, the program reports that it has found 5.5 × 1012 preimages. However, I don't know if the compiler just ignores parts of the code (and I don't have the assembly knowledge to verify). # C#, 1.052 × 1010 The idea is to do the hash function in reverse to get all possible un-hashed strings from the given number. Integer overflow of the 32-bit hash value is also emulated in reverse by incrementing the given hash value by 2^32 on each iteration. UPDATE: I've made several micro-optimisations that significantly improved the performance of my program. The new version produced 10.52 billion results in 15 minutes (compared to 9.05 billion in 1 hour for the previous version). Futher improvement may be difficult since the output file was 117GB in size and that's about how much free space I have on my SSD. Writing results to the screen doesn't seem to be a viable option since it's almost a thousand times slower than writing to a file. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Diagnostics; using System.IO; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace Unhash { class Program { const int minChar = 32; const int maxChar = 126; // limit maxStrLength to make sure that max hash value does not exceed long.MaxValue (2^63 - 1) const int maxStrLength = 12; static long[] minHashValues; static long[] maxHashValues; static Program() { minHashValues = new long[maxStrLength + 1]; for (int strLength = 0; strLength <= maxStrLength; strLength++) minHashValues[strLength] = Pow(31, strLength) / (31 - 1) * minChar; maxHashValues = new long[maxStrLength + 1]; for (int strLength = 0; strLength <= maxStrLength; strLength++) maxHashValues[strLength] = Pow(31, strLength) / (31 - 1) * maxChar; } static void GuessHash(int hash, int maxLength = 256) { Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew(); var timeLimit = new TimeSpan(0, 15, 0); if (maxLength > maxStrLength) maxLength = maxStrLength; long currentHash = (uint)hash; long step = 1L << 32; const int bufferSize = 32 * 1024; using (var writer = new StreamWriter("output.txt", false, new UTF8Encoding(false), bufferSize)) { for (int strLength = 0; strLength <= maxLength; strLength++) { long maxHash = maxHashValues[strLength]; if (currentHash > maxHash) continue; long minHash = minHashValues[strLength]; while (currentHash < minHash) currentHash += step; while ((currentHash <= maxHash) && (sw.Elapsed < timeLimit)) { GuessLongHash(writer, currentHash, new char[strLength], strLength - 1); currentHash += step; } } } } static void GuessLongHash(StreamWriter writer, long hash, char[] chars, int charPos) { if (hash <= maxChar) { char ch = (char)hash; if (ch >= minChar) { chars[charPos] = ch; writer.WriteLine(new string(chars)); } return; } char c = (char)(hash % 31); while (c < minChar) c += (char)31; while (c <= maxChar) { chars[charPos] = c; GuessLongHash(writer, (hash - c) / 31, chars, charPos - 1); c += (char)31; } } static long Pow(int value, int exponent) { long result = 1; for (int i = 0; i < exponent; i++) result *= value; return result; } static void Main(string[] args) { const int hash = 69066349; GuessHash(hash); } } }  • You don't have to write to a file, just record each result. I should have posted that though, sorry, and great work! – jocopa3 Sep 26 '14 at 20:36 • @jocopa3 Thanks! My idea was that the results have to be stored somewhere, and writing them to a file seems to be the fastest option. So, is that okay to just increment a counter for each result, and then discard the produced string? – Suboptimus Prime Sep 27 '14 at 7:43 # Scala One "useful" characteristic of Java's String.hashCode method is that if you have a string z with z.hashCode() == 0, then you also have that (z + x).hashCode() == x.hashCode() for any other string x. So even if we can find a relatively small number of strings with a given hashCode, we can just prefix it with a bunch of zero-hash strings, and generate as many strings as we like with that hashCode - the performance limit becomes string concatenation and IO at that point. So how do we find a string with a particular hashCode? In truth, brute force would probably be enough, due to the zero-hash trick, but we can easily get more speed with a meet-in-the-middle trick. Let's suppose we want a string of length 10. To do this, we calculate the hashes of all strings of length 5. In this case, the hash of x + y will be x.hashCode() * 31 ** 5 + y.hashCode, so we can either start with x, and look for strings y whose hash is target - x.hashCode() * 31 ** 5, or start with y and look for strings whose hash is (target - y.hashCode) / (31 ** 5) (where division is modulo 2^32). In fact, we do both. Right now, even length strings are better optimised than odd length strings, for reasons that are probably apparent. Using the zero-hash trick, I can get 1.6 million strings per second on my laptop - printing the output is the main bottleneck. Without the zero-hash trick (for example, if you want short strings - too short to pad with zero-hash strings), the performance is more modest. The birthday paradox means it gets faster as it runs, but it seems to level-off at around 70000 strings per second, for strings of length 10. There's one worthwhile optimisation to note. If we're storing the hashes for a large number of strings, it would seem to make sense to either keep them in a hashtable, or an equivalent on-disk structure. However, an on-disk structure is too slow, and there isn't room for everything in memory (on my laptop, at least). So instead, we keep the data in a fixed-size 1-way cache. This means that data can be lost from the cache, but it improves performance. By increasing hashtableSize, you can increase the size of this cache, using more memory, and leading to more matches. import scala.collection.mutable import scala.collection.JavaConversions._ import java.io.File import java.io.RandomAccessFile import java.io.FileWriter object Unhash { val maxChar = 126.toChar val minChar = 32.toChar val hashtableSize = 0x4000000 def allStrings(l: Int): Iterator[String] = { new Iterator[String] { val currentArray = Array.fill(l)(minChar) var _hasNext = l > 0 def hasNext = _hasNext def next(): String = { if (!_hasNext) throw new NoSuchElementException val result = new String(currentArray) var i = 0 while (i < l) { if (currentArray(i) != maxChar) { val result = new String(currentArray) currentArray(i) = (currentArray(i) + 1).toChar return result } else { currentArray(i) = minChar i += 1 } } _hasNext = false return result } } } def pow(x: Int, n: Int) = { var r = 1 var p = n var m = x while (p > 0) { if ((p & 1) == 1) r *= m m *= m p >>= 1 } r } def guessHash(target: Int, length: Int) = { length match { case l if l % 2 == 0 => findEven(target, length / 2) case _ => findOdd(target, (length - 1) / 2) } } def findEven(target: Int, halfLength: Int) = { val hashes = new HashCache(halfLength, hashtableSize) val multFactor = pow(31, halfLength) val divideFactor = BigInt(multFactor).modInverse(BigInt(2) pow 32).intValue new Traversable[String] { def foreach[U](f: String => U) = { for (string <- allStrings(halfLength)) { val hash = string.hashCode hashes.put(string) // Find possible suffixes { val effectiveTarget = target - hash * multFactor for (x <- hashes.get(effectiveTarget)) f(string + x) } // Find possible prefixes { val effectiveTarget = (target - hash) * divideFactor for (x <- hashes.get(effectiveTarget)) f(x + string) } } } } } def findOdd(target: Int, halfLength: Int) = { val hashes = new HashCache(halfLength, hashtableSize) val multFactor = pow(31, halfLength) val divideFactor = BigInt(multFactor).modInverse(BigInt(2) pow 32).intValue new Traversable[String] { def foreach[U](f: String => U) = { for (string <- allStrings(halfLength); hash = string.hashCode; _ = hashes.put(string); firstChar <- minChar to maxChar) { // Adjust the target, by subtracting the contribution from the first char val currentTarget = target - firstChar * pow(31, 2 * halfLength) // Find possible suffixes { val effectiveTarget = currentTarget - hash * multFactor for (x <- hashes.get(effectiveTarget)) f(firstChar + string + x) } //Find possible prefixes { val effectiveTarget = (currentTarget - hash) * divideFactor for (x <- hashes.get(effectiveTarget)) f(firstChar + x + string) } } } } } def guessAnyLength(target: Int) = { new Traversable[String] { def foreach[U](f: String => U) = { val zeroHashes = findEven(0, 4).toArray for (len5 <- findEven(target, 4); zero1 <- zeroHashes.iterator; zero2 <- zeroHashes.iterator; zero3 <- zeroHashes.iterator) f(zero1 + zero2 + zero3 + len5) } } } def main(args: Array[String]) = { val startTime = System.nanoTime val Array(output, length, target) = args val t = target.toInt val resultIterator = length match { case "any" => guessAnyLength(t) case _ => val l = length.toInt guessHash(t, l) } var i = 0L var lastPrinted = System.nanoTime var lastI = 0L val outputWriter = new FileWriter(output) try { for (res <- resultIterator) { outputWriter.write(res + "\n") i += 1 val now = System.nanoTime if (now > lastPrinted + 1000000000L) { println(s"Found$i total, at ${i - lastI} per second") lastPrinted = System.nanoTime lastI = i } } } finally { outputWriter.close() } } } class HashCache(stringLength: Int, size: Int) { require ((size & (size - 1)) == 0, "Size must be power of 2") val data = new Array[Char](stringLength * size) def get(hash: Int) = { val loc = hash & (size - 1) val string = new String(data, stringLength * loc, stringLength) if (string.hashCode == hash) Some(string) else None } def put(string: String) = { val loc = string.hashCode & (size - 1) string.getChars(0, stringLength, data, stringLength * loc) } }  PHP I found 81 possible solutions for 69066349 within 0.016 seconds with this code! Btw I didn't try to implement the overflow functionality. $results = 0;

/**
* Get the string for a hash
* @param integer $hash hash value * @param integer$length length of the returned string
* @return string $string */ function reverseHash($hash,$length=false,$val='',$counter=0) { global$results;
if (!$length) {$length = 0;
$copyHash =$hash;
while (($copyHash-32)/31 > 0) {$copyHash = ($copyHash-126)/31;$length++;
}
echo 'MaxLength: '.$length.'<br>'; } // if at least one more recursion is needed if ($counter < $length) { for ($i = 32; $i <= 126;$i++) {
$string = false;$newhash = ($hash-$i)/31;
$newval = chr($i).$val; if ($newhash > 0) {
// if the new hash isn't an integer => $newval is wrong if (floor($newhash) == $newhash) {$string = reverseHash($newhash,$length,$newval,$counter+1);
}
if ($string) { return$string;
}
} else if ($counter <=$length-1 and $newhash == 0) { echo$newval.'<br>';
$results++; } } } else { return false; } }$start = microtime(true);
reverseHash($_GET['hash']);$end = microtime(true);
$dif =$end-$start; echo "Time ".$dif." sec (".\$results.")";