Skip to main content

Kember Identity

Ever wonder if there is an MD5 hash the same as the original input? Nope, me neither. But Mr. Kember does and he's asking the world to help him find out if such a thing exists. There's no fame if you find it for him (he's humbly named it the "Kember Identity" already)—but you might make a little cash. Check out his web page for the details. Go ahead and enter his contest if you're feeling gullible lucky!

The MD5 algorithm returns a fixed-length 128-bit hash, so there are 2128 possible values. The hash is typically expressed as a series of 32 hexadecimal values. Since the input string and its hash must be the same to reflect the Kember Identity, you wouldn't need to test random strings like "ruby on rails rots your brain"; you only need to test strings that are 32-characters long and contain the numbers 0 though 9 and letters a through f like 8d112b3c68248c12f178188c1b921ec1.

Kember suggests testing values at random because the range of candidates is so large (2128 is 34,028,236,692,093,846,346,337,460,743,177). Unfortunately, there're a few problems with this approach:It actually takes less time to test all values sequentially than through random-selection.

Additionally, one has to consider the possibility that such a value doesn't exist. The odds of finding the Kember Identity are actually quite small: 1/((2128!)/( 2128!)(1-2128)!). So how would you know when all possible values have been tested proving the Kember identity doesn't exist if the values are tested randomly? You don't.

The only reliable way to programmatically identify whether the Kember Identity exists and what hashes exhibit it is to test each hashes sequentially and record the results.

The whole thing might not bother me if money wasn't involved. Just send Mr. Kember your $5 entry fee and you're eligible to win the prize pot if your script is first to find the magical hash! But I have a few questions:
  • How do I contact Mr. Kember to receive my prize when I find a hash that exhibits the Kember Identity?

  • What happens to my $5 and the rest of the prize money if it is proven the Identity doesn't exist?

  • At 60-million hashes an hour, it would take over 646,987,670,262,051,588,140,743 millennia to verify them all. How long does Mr. Kember plan on holding on to the prize money?
While it might not be a scam (it says explicitly that it's not a scam somewhere on the irrationally highlighted contest page), it isn't well thought out.

Comments

  1. What the hell does any of this mean??? LOL.. DUDE! Good lord.. I think I hurt my brain bad... oyyyy.. now I think I just need a drink!!! LOLOLOLOL

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Composing Music with PHP

I’m not an expert on probability theory, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. And even my Music 201 class from years ago has been long forgotten. But if you’ll indulge me for the next 10 minutes, I think you’ll find that even just a little knowledge can yield impressive results if creatively woven together. I’d like to share with you how to teach PHP to compose music. Here’s an example: You’re looking at a melody generated by PHP. It’s not the most memorable, but it’s not unpleasant either. And surprisingly, the code to generate such sequences is rather brief. So what’s going on? The script calculates a probability map of melodic intervals and applies a Markov process to generate a new sequence. In friendlier terms, musical data is analyzed by a script to learn which intervals make up pleasing melodies. It then creates a new composition by selecting pitches based on the possibilities it’s observed. . Standing on Shoulders Composition doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Bach wa

Learning Prolog

I'm not quite sure exactly I was searching for, but somehow I serendipitously stumbled upon the site learnprolognow.org a few months ago. It's the home for an introductory Prolog programming course. Logic programming offers an interesting way to think about your problems; I've been doing so much procedural and object-oriented programming in the past decade that it really took effort to think at a higher level! I found the most interesting features to be definite clause grammars (DCG), and unification. Difference lists are very powerful and Prolog's DCG syntax makes it easy to work with them. Specifying a grammar such as: s(s(NP,VP)) --> np(NP,X,Y,subject), vp(VP,X,Y). np(np(DET,NBAR,PP),X,Y,_) --> det(DET,X), nbar(NBAR,X,Y), pp(PP). np(np(DET,NBAR),X,Y,_) --> det(DET,X), nbar(NBAR,X,Y). np(np(PRO),X,Y,Z) --> pro(PRO,X,Y,Z). vp(vp(V),X,Y) --> v(V,X,Y). vp(vp(V,NP),X,Y) --> v(V,X,Y), np(NP,_,_,object). nbar(nbar(JP),X,3) --> jp(JP,X). pp(pp(PREP,N

What's Wrong with OOP

Proponents of Object Oriented Programming feel the paradigm yields code that is better organized, easier to understand and maintain, and reusable. They view procedural programming code as unwieldy spaghetti and embrace OO-centric design patterns as the "right way" to do things. They argue objects are easier to grasp because they model how we view the world. If the popularity of languages like Java and C# is any indication, they may be right. But after almost 20 years of OOP in the mainstream, there's still a large portion of programmers who resist it. If objects truly model the way people think of things in the real world, then why do people have a hard time understanding and working in OOP? I suspect the problem might be the focus on objects instead of actions. If I may quote from Steve Yegge's Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns : Verbs in Javaland are responsible for all the work, but as they are held in contempt by all, no Verb is ever permitted to wander about