I will post an image here and show you what I mean. Currently when I drag and drop imagerel from file explorer into the Image Hash option under Search or insert post number on this page:https://archive.4plebs.org/s4sI get the hash ontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8gWhen I open the file in my browser (MS Edge) I also get the same hash, ontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8gNow, I will post this and show you what I am confused about, or what the problem is I suppose.Your fortune: Godly Luck
>>12705511*When I open the file in my browser (MS Edge) and drag and drop it I also get the same hashis what I meant.Anyways, now that I've posted this, clicking View Same on this post on 4plebs gives me the image hash j9Lzup2arxFD9wFETPKVaQDragging and dropping the image from its page on 4plebs also gives me the hash j9Lzup2arxFD9wFETPKVaQBut dragging and dropping it from this thread, unmaximized, gives me lBi-XgI20b4hdue2FSylegMaximizing the image in this page gives meontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8gAnd dragging and dropping the image from its page here also gives me ontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8gMy question at the end of the day is why 4plebs has a different has (do they compress images?) and also how I can take an image like this and get the hash 4plebs would get of it without uploading a post of it like I just have. Because if I am looking for postings of a particular image, I may not have already found a post with the image, and I won't be able to go into the archive and "View Same" it.For the record I'm not actually looking for other posts with picrel both because I just am not and also because there's already a post in the 4plebs archive with this image.
I think a few years ago some fags on /v/ were embedding porn in images and mods had to put a stop to that. Hashes have been weird since then.
>>12705511>>12705521correct me if I am wrongyou have an image and want to find the hash that would be given to said image without uploading it hereYour fortune: （ ´_ゝ`）ﾌｰﾝ
>>12705511because racecarYour fortune: Good news will come to you by mail
>>12705569Yes
>>12705576the hash algorithm used is md5, use an online md5 file checksum, make sure it is set to base64. That should give you the hash. Come back if it works, if it doesn't come back too, we can work through itYour fortune: Average Luck
>>12705581I did so, and got the same hash that the 4plebs version didn't generate (ontP/Jup7csnhye6oTwY8g==)er, well, it's not exactly the same but I'm guessing it's a stylistic difference, not really too familiar with hashes and base64.website I used: https://geraudloup.github.io/online-tools/md5_checksum.htmlYour fortune: Outlook good
>>12705581so is this the result you wanted or did you want the hash that would be generated from an unmaximised image?Your fortune: Good news will come to you by mail
>>12705599The result I want is to be able to hash search an image I have on my computer on 4plebs. To do that I want to get the hash that would be generated from 4plebs' archive of my image. The hash that I got from that github page is accurate to the image, but is not the hash generated from 4plebs' archive of my image, which is what is generated when you click "View Same", which is j9Lzup2arxFD9wFETPKVaQ and which, when you search 4plebs' archive for, you get other posts with the same imageWhich would be this: https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/j9Lzup2arxFD9wFETPKVaQ/I can find plenty of other images with the same hash. But since 4plebs' archive of my image generates this hash, which is different than the hash generated from my original image, if I just search the hash of my original image, I get no results.That would be this page (no results, from dragging my image in through file explorer): https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/image/ontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8g/I probably shouldn't have mentioned the unmaximised hash because it's not exactly relevant but I though it might have something to do with the reason behind the fact these hashes are different. The unmaximised version is probably just compressed/smaller which is what I figured 4plebs' version is.
>>12705511it's an old problem and it can"t be helped I think, but let me check the dubs in your thread: check>>12705599dubs check once more
>>12705511Check exif data if the image aspect ratio, and file format are same. If file explorer drag and drop adds exif/exim location data, I think 4chan will scrub User above has a smay-are-te add-vie-see too. also check the encoding of the string, the hash algorithm being used, and read the wikipedia article diagram on 1-way hash functions.Then again. Double check everything yourself, because I'm an retarded, and everyone else might be some of that too, the universe is uncertain. Trust but verify.
>>12705511>Maximizing the image in this page gives me>ontP_Jup7csnhye6oTwY8gMy bad, I don't read anything I just talk over everyone like a really wide asshole.Aspect ratio. The minimized file is a thumbnail of the original, which is a different file, which will produce a different hash?
