The input string can be a unicode string.Do the output string after calculating SHA1 will always return ASCII characters?
It depends but strictly speaking, no. The output of the SHA-1 hash is 160 bits, or 20 bytes, but the bytes are not guaranteed to be in the ASCII range.
However, some hash functions output the hex equivalent (i.e. 40 characters) of the 20 bytes, so if the first three bytes of the actual hash are 0x7e, 0x03, and 0xb2, the output would begin with "7e03b2", in which case the output is ASCII.
SHA1 returns 20 bytes. SHA1 does not deal with encodings, text, ASCII, etc.
One common way to represent binary data is by encoding it in hexadecimal - in this case, the output is always [a-f][0-9]
sha1 returns a binary string. Some sha1 functions may, as a convenience, also encode that binary string into hexadecimal or base64 - if so, the result will be ASCII characters. But sha1 itself does not return ASCII.
Related
If we percent encode the char "€", we will have %E2%82%AC as result. Ok!
My problem:
a = %61
I already know it.
Is it possible to encode "a" to something like %XX%XX or %XX%XX%XX?
If yes, will browsers and servers understand the result as the char "a"?
If we percent encode the char "€", we will have %E2%82%AC as result.
€ is Unicode codepoint U+20AC EURO SIGN. The byte sequence 0xE2 0x82 0xAC is how U+20AC is encoded in UTF-8. %E2%82%AC is the URL encoding of those bytes.
a = %61
I already know it.
For ASCII character a, aka Unicode codepoint U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A, that is correct. It is encoded as byte 0x61 in UTF-8 (and most other charsets), and thus can be encoded as %61 in URLs.
Is it possible to encode "a" to something like %XX%XX or %XX%XX%XX?
Yes. Any character can be encoded using percent encoding in a URL. Simply encode the character in the appropriate charset, and then percent-encode the resulting bytes. However, most ASCII non-reserved characters do not require such encoding, just use them as-is.
If yes, will browsers and servers understand the result as the char "a"?
In URLs and URL-like content encodings (like application/x-www-webform-urlencoded), yes.
I want to decode two Base64 encoded strings and combine them to make one 128 bit string. I am able to decode the Base64 encoded strings. Can some one guide me on how to combine these two decoded strings?
This is the code I used for decoding the two encoded strings.
NSData *decodedData_contentKey = [[NSData alloc] initWithBase64EncodedString:str_content options:0];
NSString *decodedString_contentKey = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:decodedData_contentKey encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding];
NSLog(#"%#", decodedString_contentKey);
Thanks.
Base 64 is a statically sized encoding of octets/bytes into characters/text: 6 bits of a byte are represented as a printable ASCII character. Hence the name: 2^6 = 64, it uses a alphabet of 64 characters to encode the binary data (+ plus a delimiter character: '=' that does not contain encoded bits).
UTF-8 - used in your sample code - on the other hand is a character-encoding. It is used to encode characters in octets. So character encoding works the other way around. What you are actually doing is to decode the characters back from the bytes. UTF-8 does not use 128 bit values, nor does is it statically sized; multiple bytes may be used to represent one character. It will likely fail when it comes across an octet or octets that do not combine into a valid character encoding.
There is no such thing as base 128 encoding. Please think of what you are trying to accomplish and ask a new question that we can decode, if you get stuck.
GUESSED ANSWER:
Base 64 encoding will output 64 bits (8 bytes) of ASCII text for each 6 bytes. Therefore, if you want 128 bit (16 bytes) of encoding output, you simply have to input 12 bytes. As the base 64 encoding restarts at each 4 character boundary however (4 * 8 = 32 bits of encoding, each 8 bit character represents 6 bits, 4 * 6 = 24 bits of data, 24 bits is 3 bytes -> each 4 character string holds precisely 3 bytes of input), you can simply concatenate the two base 64 strings without decoding.
I'm trying to take HEX bytes and display them as their ASCII values. If someone could point me reasonably firmly in the right direction I'd be obliged. Tried any number of uint-type commands, and working with buffer(x, 2) as an argument.
I'm not sure what you mean by hex bytes, but the relevant functions are:
string.byte, which converts chars to numerical codes
string.char, which converts numerical codes to chars
For a single character in hexadecimal, you can use string.byte as mentioned by lhf. For longer sequences, you can create a loop in Lua, but that is not very efficient since it involves a lot of copying.
Since Wireshark 1.11.3 there is a Struct.fromhex function that converts a string of hexadecimal characters to the binary equivalent.
Example:
-- From hex to bytes (with no separators)
assert(Struct.fromhex("5753") == "WS")
-- From hex to bytes (using a single space as separator)
assert(Struct.fromhex("57 53", " ") == "WS")
Similarly, there is a Struct.tohex function that converts from bytes to hex.
I'm currently struggling with percent escaping special characters on iOS, for instance "é" when contained in a query parameter value.
I'm using AFNetworking, but the issue isn't specific to it.
The "é" character should be percent escaped to "%E9", yet the result is "%C3%A9". The reason is because "é" is represented as those 2 bytes in UTF8.
The actual percent escaping method is the well known one and I'm passing UTF8 as string encoding. The string itself is #"é".
static NSString * AFPercentEscapedQueryStringPairMemberFromStringWithEncoding(NSString *string, NSStringEncoding encoding)
{
static NSString * const kAFCharactersToBeEscaped = #":/?&=;+!##$()~";
static NSString * const kAFCharactersToLeaveUnescaped = #"[].";
return (__bridge_transfer NSString *)CFURLCreateStringByAddingPercentEscapes(kCFAllocatorDefault, (__bridge CFStringRef)string, (__bridge CFStringRef)kAFCharactersToLeaveUnescaped, (__bridge CFStringRef)kAFCharactersToBeEscaped, CFStringConvertNSStringEncodingToEncoding(encoding));
}
I had hoped passing in UTF16 string encoding would solve it, but it doesn't. The result is "%FF%FE%E9%00" in this case, it contains "%E9" but I must be missing something obvious.
Somehow I can't get my head around it.
Any pointers would be awesome.
RFC 3986 explains that, unless the characters you're encoding fall into the unreserved US-ASCII range, the convention is to convert the character to (in this case, A UTF8-encoded) byte value, and and use that value as the percent encoding base.
The behavior you're seeing is correct.
The disparity between the encoded values given for UTF-8 vs. UTF-16 is due to a couple of factors.
Encoding Differences
First, there's the difference in the way that the respective encodings are actually defined. UTF-16 will always use two bytes to represent its character, and essentially concatenates the higher order byte with the lower order byte to define the code. (The ordering of these bytes will depend on whether the code is encoded as Little Endian or Big Endian.) UTF-8, on the other hand, uses a dynamic number of bytes, depending on where in the Unicode code page the character exists. The way UTF-8 relates how many bytes it's going to use is by the bits that are set in the first byte itself.
So if we look at C3 A9, that translates into the following bits:
1100 0011 1010 1001
Looking at RFC 2279, we see that the beginning set of '1's with an terminating '0' denotes how many bytes will be used--in this case, 2. Stripping off the initial 110 metadata, we're left with 00011 from the first byte: that represents the leftmost bits of the actual value.
For the next byte (1010 1001), again from the RFC we see that, for every subsequent byte, 10 will be "prefix" metadata for the actual value. Stripping that off, we're left with 101001.
Concatenating the actual value bits, we end up with 00011 101001, which is 233 in base-10, or E9 in base-16.
Encoding Identification
The other thing to consider specifically from the UTF-16 value (%FF%FE%E9%00) is from the original RFC, which mentions that there's no explicit definition of the encoding used, in the encoded value itself. So in this case, iOS is "cheating", giving you an indication of what encoding is used. FF FE is a well-known byte-ordering mark used in UTF-16 encoded files, to denote that UTF-16 is the encoding used. As for E9 00, as mentioned, UTF-16 always uses two bytes. In this case, since all of its data can be represented in 1 byte, the other is simply null.
I have a Blackberry project that I'm working on and I need to convert byte arrays of strings encoded using UTF-16LE (little endian) to a byte array of string in the UTF-16BE (big endian) encoding, and vis. versa. A server I'm connecting to is sending the BlackBerry device byte arrays of strings in the UTF-16LE encoding however the device doesn't natively support UTF-16LE. When I try to decode the byte arrays back into strings, the strings are illegible. The device does, however, support UTF-16BE. I also need to reverse this process, i.e. convert a byte array of a string with UTF-16BE encoding into the what the server is expecting (UTF-16LE). Thanks.
I cannot do this on the device:
String test = "test";
byte[] testBytes = test.getBytes("UTF-16LE");// throws UnsupportedEncodingException
I can do this:
String test = "test";
byte[] testBytes = test.getBytes("UTF-16BE");//works
UTF-16 uses two bytes per codeunit, with some Unicode codepoints encoded using one codeunit and other codepoints using two codeunits (called a surrogate pair).
To convert between UTF-16LE and UTF-16BE, simply loop through the bytes swapping the order of each 2-byte pair of each codeunit. The order of surrogate codeunits does not change between LE and BE. IOW, simply swap bytes 0 and 1 with each other, swap bytes 2 and 3 with each other, and so on.