Ccleaner mac duplicate finder11/27/2023 ![]() ![]() The program found tons of files + it was letting me choose after every file what to do with it.Things were going well, until it started to speed up + stopped asking what to do with files + took over. I had a really bad experience with a dupe file prog about 7 yrs ago. Not quite sure how it got to that, but It turned out ok in the end.Phew!!! Just wondering if this has happened to anyone else. I couldn't cancel, I couldn't click to minimize or shut down, I couldn't even right click on the program on the taskbar to close.I ended up having to do the unthinkable + reboot by going straight to the start button + overriding the task manager to not wait for the program to finish uninstalling. The interface greyed out + I could do no more with it. It started up ok, filled the page but when it got to the bottom, it just froze. It was doing a good job with other tasks, but then I thought I'd give the Dupe File Finder a go for all the pics I have on my HD. I didn't fancy trusting the Beta, so this seemed great.I have used CCleaner for quite some time now + never had a problem.Until today. ![]() I was just reading this thread as I was looking for an answer to a problem I had today with a newly installed v5.0 CCleaner.I had to install again as there was a problem with my pc losing part of a file.When I uninstalled, I thought I'd load the new version. Hi, I'm pretty new to this forum, although I have popped in from time to time. Otherwise I have utilities that will do a byte by byte comparison - It is a capability I almost never use - life is too short. When I want to "know for sure" whether two files are the same then I use "HashMyFiles" from Nirsoft, and I am happy to live with the 1 in millions of possibilities that the same bit restricted hash output could be produced by files with different content, The only difference I can see is in the amount of the probability of error. SHA-512 is overwhelmed by a 64 kB file just as much as CCR32 is just overwhelmed by a 4 kB file. I do not understand how you expect perfect distinction via "proper hashing algorithm" between files that are likely be hundreds of times larger than 64 bytes.ĬCR32 has a 32 bit output value which can distinguish between any two files that are up to 4 bytes in size SHA-512 has an output value of 512 bits that can distinguish between any two files that are up to 64 bytes in size ![]() MD5 has an output value of 128 bits that can distinguish between any two files that are up to 16 bytes in size Please explain why you would believe that. That is a risk I am happy to take - I do not even have 4 billion files with different namesĪgain, it's not just as simple as the theoretical mathematics. Then on average one file may have been deleted even though the content was different. To finish off by computing checksums to ensure the contents also match.Ī CRC32 error rate of one in 4,294,967,296 means that after deleting 4,294,967,296 "duplicate" files, It can only be sensible to look for matching file names and sizes,Īnd then as suggested in this topic title, If you really want to avoid malicious 'cleverness' you need SHA-256 or better,Īnd it would be infinitely preferable to validate a download BEFORE it ever gets moved into your system for use before CCleaner ever gets around to accessing it. I totally disagree with recommending MD5 for protection against malicious 'cleverness', because some years ago it was being cracked, see for example. I totally disagree with your conclusions as applied to this particular application. I think having a (reliable) duplicate file finder built right into CCleaner is an excellent thing, but at the moment it just isn't. I'm sorry if I'm sounding overly critical/negative. You need to use a proper hashing algorithm, such as MDx or SHA-x. It's not an issue of mathematics, it's an issue of maliciousness (and fundamentally design). Not even CRC32, this is simply not suitable. It's just these sorts of suspicious files you might want to verify. I've seen on numerous occasions, through either malicious 'cleverness' or simply quirks of design, DISTINCT files that share the same CRC32 but clearly not the same MD5/SHA-1. ![]() To have an even half way proper duplicate file finder, the mechanism for identifying such files MUST be some sort of hashing algorithm *as a CRC32, this is simply not suitable. I completely agree with Keatah and 4NTFan.Īs a long time fan of CCleaner I was excited to see this new feature added, but in its current implementation it's beyond useless. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |