Zygmunt

I can agree with the fact that sha256 or even lower like sha1, md5 or crc32 will be enough to check if files are identical carried the possibility of data damaged and not forged by user. But in the end, using only common data hash value for folder seems to be not a perfect way to check if folder content has really the same files as other folder we check. Like You said earlier: 123+456+789 will give 1368, and any combination of these numbers will also give 1368 but 456+912 will also give 1368 in the...

I can agree with the fact that sha256 or even lower like sha1, md5 or crc32 will be enough to check if files are identical carried the possibility of data damaged and not forged by user. But in the end, using only common data hash value for folder seems to be not a perfect way to check if folder content has really the same files as other folder we check. Like You said earlier: 123+456+789 will give 1368, and any combination of these numbers will also give 1368 but 456+912 will also give 1368 in the...

Ok, both hashes are represented in hex. So You are telling me 7zip creates hashes for all files in folder and then makes a simple sum of all of them and still presents it as a hash with exact number of characters. So, where is the additional number which is a result of overflow? Is it the number in additional string after -? For example for sha1: 6c51225f2b2dc72140b1c31c3f464d59e546dfe4-00000006 I think it is possible although very rare to get the same one hash for data result even if files in folder...

Ok, both hashes are represented in hex. So You are telling me 7zip creates hashes for all files in folder and then makes a simple sum of all of them and still presents it as a hash with exact number of characters. So, where is the additional number which is a result of overflow? Is it the number in additional string after -? For example for sha1: 6c51225f2b2dc72140b1c31c3f464d59e546dfe4-00000006 I think it is possible although very rare to get the same one hash for data result even if files in folder...

I have folder with bunch of image files. I have generated SHA1 checksum for data for this folder. I did some cleaning and renamed some files which made them placed in different order sorted by name. Then I copied whole folder to different drive and generated SHA1 again for new folder. I got different checksum for names (which is obvious) but i still got the same checksum for data. I tried to do different operations on origin folder but until i change content of one of file or remove one of the file,...

I have folder with bunch of image files. I have generated SHA1 checksum for data for this folder. I did some cleaning and renamed some files which made them placed in different folder sorted by name. Then I copied whole folder to different drive and generated SHA1 again for new folder. I got different checksum for names (which is obvious) but i still got the same checksum for data. I tried to do different operations on origin folder but until i change content of one of file or remove one of the file,...

Interesting. Not sure why You did it this way and not by expanding h -scrc functionality but it works. Thank You very much. Shouldn't asterisk character prefix the filename like in binary mode? I don't know if binary mode in md5sum even work or it is only empty mode though.

Hello. Did anything happen with my small request?