I'm trying to generate a unique order number for my ecommerce application, this is my code:
<?php
$bytes = random_bytes(3);
$random_hash = bin2hex($bytes);
$order_num = $random_hash . "1";
echo strtoupper(hash('crc32b', $order_num));
The order number (in the example is 1), is going to be an auto-increment value retrieved from MySQL.
Does this ensure me uniqueness?
I wanted a short max 8-10 chars unique final value.
An only numbers solution would be fine too.
As far as I know, most hash algorithms make no guarantee of when collisions might occur, so you're probably just as likely to get a collision with your proposed code as using the random part on its own.
If the auto-increment part is unique, and the random part is just to avoid guesses, you could just concatenate the two parts together (i.e. everything in your example before the hash call). That way if the same random number comes up twice, it will have different numbers on the end.
If that results in something too long, you could do something with base_convert or asc to convert the number into a shorter representation.
The hash function will not provide any uniqueness to the id, it only obfuscates the id a bit.
If you have lets say 100 possible values, you would get 100 possible hashes from them, no more. If an attacker wants to brute-force the hashes, he can pick the 100 possible hashes and try them.
In your case with 3 bytes of randomness, you would not get all possible combinations before you get a duplicate. So the same random number would be generated much earlier than with 3 bytes of possible combinations.
There are two common approaches when it comes to unique ids:
You let the database automatically increment the id, this makes sure that the id is unique.
You generate a UUID (global id with 16 bytes) which offers such a huge keyspace, that a duplicate is extremely unlikely. In practice one can neglate the possiblilty of duplicates.
The UUID has a lot of advantages and one disadvantage:
(+) UUID's can work decentralized e.g. in an offline scenario.
(+) One can generate the id before it is inserted in the database, so one has not to wait before the row is created in the db.
(+) The ids are not deterministic, so an attacker cannot guess the next id.
(-) They use more storage space and are a bit slower when searching.
(This question is not about PHP type-casting.)
I have read in couple of questions what it is best not to show record id to users, but use another value, which doesn't give out any information about howmany record there is in the database, etc. I wanted to implement this, and after searching on google, surprisingly no solution was found.
So, my question is, is it possible to convert a (long, for example) sequence of strings to unique (or unique enough for at least million converts) sequence of numbers, is there any options available which I have no idea of?
Just to show you an example:
$uName = $this->newUsername;
$publicId = $this->strToInt(somecomplexstring); // Outputs something like 13272992
// Or feed with username
$publicId = $this->strToInt($uName);
You might considering using something like a slug. So your user will have an unique id in the database but also an unique slug (random string, ex. TGqJItemU5TGqJItemU5f6S5VaCr2n). You can then use this slug instead of the id when presenting data to the browser.
As stated in a comment, you can use uniquid to get a unique string. this function will return an hexadecimal string.
If you need only numbers, you just have to convert the hex to a decimal number with this hexdec.
The final code will look like this :
hexdec(uniqid());
An other way to get an integer from a string is to use md5. This function also returns a hex string so you will have to use hexdec to get a decimal number
Please note that a md5 is not a unique string, there is a (very small) probability of accidental collision (1 in 340 undecillion, see How many random elements before MD5 produces collisions ? for more info)
You can use:
md5(uniqid(rand(), true))
I'm building a MySQL database with a table that will store lots of rows (say, like 1.000.000).
Each row will have a numeric ID but I don't want to make it incremental, instead it has to be generated from a unique string.
For example, a user ABC will create a new element at time 123, so the original string will be "ABC-123". A PHP function will "translate" it to a number.
This way, I'll have the possibility to re-generate the same ID from the same pair of data in future. More or less... see it as a Java hashCode() function.
I've found this function that "translates" a string into a number:
function hashCode($string) {
return base_convert(substr(md5($string), 0, 16), 16, 10);
}
I have some doubts about it. First, it starts from creating an md5 hash which is 32 characters long, then cuts it to 16. It's a visible lack of data so how could that be an unique hash?
Second, the produced 16-digits number is converted from base-16 to base-10, so the max value is 18446744073709552046. The MySQL column that will store this number has an UNSIGNED BIGINT datatype so the maximum value is 18446744073709551615. It's not enough since
18446744073709551615 - 18446744073709552046 = -431
Am I missing something, or is there a better way to do what I need?
In order to produce a unique Id I suppose I must use the uniqid function in php.
But uniqid produces a 13 digits long HEXA number, by default.
4f66835b507db
I would like to reduce this number to 7 digits long NUMERIC number but I want to conserve the unicity. Is it possible ?
4974012
This number will be used as User Id. The authentication will be done with thid Id and a password.
Some people say uniqid is not unique ! Is it a bad choice ?
Any "unique" number will eventually have a collision after generating enough records. To ensure uniqueness, you need to store the values you generated into a database and when generating next one, you need to check if there is no collision.
However, in practice, applications usually generate IDs as a simple sequence 1,2,3,... That way you know you won't get a collision until you run out of the datatype (UINT is usually 32 bits long, which gives you 4 billion unique ids).
Uniqid is not guaranteed to be unique, even in its full length.
Furthermore, uniqid is intended to be unique only locally. This means that if you create users simultaneously on two or more servers, you may end up with one ID for two different users, even if you use full-length uniqid.
My recommendations:
If you are really looking for globally unique identifiers (i.e. your application is running on multiple servers with separate databases), you should use UUIDs. These are even longer than the ones returned by uniqid, but there is no practical chance of collisions.
If you need only locally unique identifiers, stick with AUTO_INCREMENT in your database. This is (a little) faster and (a little) safer than checking if a short random ID already exists in your database.
EDIT: As it turns out in the comments below, you are looking not only for an ID for the user, but rather you are forced to provide your users with a random login name... Which is weird, but okay. In such case, you may try to use rand in a loop, until you get one that does not exist in your database.
Pseudocode:
$min = 1;
do {
$username = "user" . rand($min, $min * 10);
$min = $min * 10;
} while (user_exists($username));
// Create your user here.
Write a while loop that generates random letters and numbers of a desired length, which loops until it creates an ID that is not already in use.
Well, by reducing it to 7 characters and only numeric, you are reducing the 'uniqueness' by a lot.
I suggest using an auto increment of the user ID and start at 1000000 if it has to be 7 digits long.
If you really must generate it without auto increment, you can use mt_rand() to generate a random number 7 digits long:
$random = mt_rand(1000000, 9999999);
This is not ideal because you will need to check if the number is already in use by another user.
If you are using a Database. Define an id column as unique and auto-incremented, and then let the database manage your ids.
It's safer.
Read more : mysql-doc
Take a lookt at this article
Create short IDs with PHP - Like Youtube or TinyURL
It explains how to generate short unique ids, like youtube does.
Actually, the function in the article is very related to php function base_convert which converts a number from a base to another (but is only up to base 36).
I have just found this great tutorial as it is something that I need.
However, after having a look, it seems that this might be inefficient. The way it works is, first generate a unique key then check if it exists in the database to make sure it really is unique. However, the larger the database gets the slower the function gets, right?
Instead, I was thinking, is there a way to add ordering to this function? So all that has to be done is check the previous entry in the DB and increment the key. So it will always be unique?
function generate_chars()
{
$num_chars = 4; //max length of random chars
$i = 0;
$my_keys = "123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"; //keys to be chosen from
$keys_length = strlen($my_keys);
$url = "";
while($i<$num_chars)
{
$rand_num = mt_rand(1, $keys_length-1);
$url .= $my_keys[$rand_num];
$i++;
}
return $url;
}
function isUnique($chars)
{
//check the uniqueness of the chars
global $link;
$q = "SELECT * FROM `urls` WHERE `unique_chars`='".$chars."'";
$r = mysql_query($q, $link);
//echo mysql_num_rows($r); die();
if( mysql_num_rows($r)>0 ):
return false;
else:
return true;
endif;
}
The tiny url people like to use random tokens because then you can't just troll the tiny url links. "Where does #2 go?" "Oh, cool!" "Where does #3 go?" "Even cooler!" You can type in random characters but it's unlikely you'll hit a valid value.
Since the key is rather sparse (4 values each having 36* possibilities gives you 1,679,616 unique values, 5 gives you 60,466,176) the chance of collisions is small (indeed, it's a desired part of the design) and a good SQL index will make the lookup be trivial (indeed, it's the primary lookup for the url so they optimize around it).
If you really want to avoid the lookup and just unse auto-increment you can create a function that turns an integer into a string of seemingly-random characters with the ability to convert back. So "1" becomes "54jcdn" and "2" becomes "pqmw21". Similar to Base64-encoding, but not using consecutive characters.
(*) I actually like using less than 36 characters -- single-cased, no vowels, and no similar characters (1, l, I). This prevents accidental swear words and also makes it easier for someone to speak the value to someone else. I even map similar charactes to each other, accepting "0" for "O". If you're entirely machine-based you could use upper and lower case and all digits for even greater possibilities.
In the database table, there is an index on the unique_chars field, so I don't see why that would be slow or inefficient.
UNIQUE KEY `unique_chars` (`unique_chars`)
Don't rush to do premature optimization on something that you think might be slow.
Also, there may be some benefit in a url shortening service that generates random urls instead of sequential urls.
I don't know why you'd bother. The premise of the tutorial is to create a "random" URL. If the random space is large enough, then you can simply rely on pure, dumb luck. If you random character space is 62 characters (A-Za-z0-9), the the 4 characters they use, given a reasonable random number generator, is 1 in 62^4, which is 1 in 14,776,336. Five characters is 1 in 916,132,832. So, a conflict is, literally, "1 in a billion".
Obviously, as the documents fill, your odds increase for the chance of a collision.
With 10,000 documents, it's 1 in 91,613, almost 1 in 100,000 (for round numbers).
That means, for every new document, you have a 1 in 91,613 chance of hitting the DB again for another pull on the slot machine.
It is not deterministic. It's random. It's luck. In theory, you can hit a string of really, really, bad luck and just get collision after collision after collision. Also, it WILL, eventually, fill up. How many URLs do you plan on hashing?
But if 1 in 91,613 odds isn't good enough, boosting it to 6 chars makes it more than 1 in 5M for 10,000 documents. We're talking almost LOTTO odds here.
Simply put, make the key big enough (7 characters? 8?) and the problem pretty much "wishes" itself out of existence.
Couldn't you encode the URL as Base36 when it's generated, and then decode it when visited - that would allow you to remove the database completely?
A snippet from Channel9:
The formula is simple, just turn the
Entry ID of our post, which is a long
into a short string by Base-36
encoding it and then stick
'http://ch9.ms/' onto the front of it.
This produces reasonably short URLs,
and can be computed at either end
without any need for a database look
up. The result, a URL like
http://ch9.ms/A49H is then used in
creating the twitter link.
I solved a similar problem by implementing an alogirthm that used to generate serial numbers one-by-one in base36. I had my own oredring of base36 characters all of which are unique. Since it was generating numbers serially I did not have to worry about duplication. Complexity and randomness of the number depends on the ordering of base36 numbers[characters]... that too for public only becuase to my application they are serial numbers :)
Check out this guys functions - http://www.pgregg.com/projects/php/base_conversion/base_conversion.php source - http://www.pgregg.com/projects/php/base_conversion/base_conversion.inc.phps
You can use any base you like, for example to convert 554512 to base 62, call
$tiny = base_base2base(554512, 10, 62); and that evaluates to $tiny = '2KFk'.
So, just pass in the unique id of the database record.
In a project I used this in a removed a few characters from the $sChars string, and am using base 58. You can also rearrange the characters in the string if you want the values to be less easy to guess.
You could of course add ordering by simply numbering the urls:
http://mytinyfier.com/1
http://mytinyfier.com/2
and so on. But if the hash key is indexed in the database (which it obviously should be), the performance boost would be minimal at best.
I wouldn't bother doing ordered enumeration for two reasons:
1) SQL servers are very effective at checking such hash collisions (given correct indexes)
2) That might hurt privacy, as users would be able to easily figure out what other users are tinyurl-ing.
Use autoincrement on the database, and get the latest id as described by http://www.acuras.co.uk/articles/24-php-use-mysqlinsertid-to-get-the-last-entered-auto-increment-value
Perhaps this is a bit off-answer, but, my general rule for creating always unique keys is simple md5( time() * 100 + rand( 0, 100 ) ); There is a one in 100,000 chance that if two people are using the same service at the same second they will get the same result (nie impossible).
That said, md5( rand( 0, n ) ) works too.
That might work, but the easiest way to accomplish the problem would probably be with hashing. Theoretically speaking, hashing runs in O(1) time, as in, it only has to perform the hash, and then does only one actual hit to the database to retrieve the value. Then, you would introduce complications for checking for hash collisions, but it seems like this is probably what most of the tinyurl providers do. And, a good hash function isn't terribly hard to write.
I have also created small tinyurl service.
I wrote a script in Python that was generating keys and store in MySQL table named tokens with status U(Unused).
But, I am doing it in offline mode. I have a corn job on my VPS. It runs a script every 10 minutes. The script check if there are less than 1000 keys in the table, it keep generating keys and inserting them if they are unique and not already exists in the table until the key's count up to 1000.
For my service, 1000 keys for 10 minutes are more than enough, you can set the timing or number of keys generated according to your need.
Now when any tiny url needs to be created on my website, my PHP script just fetch any key which is unused from the table and marked its status as T(taken). PHP script does not have to bother about its uniqueness as my python script already populated only unique keys.
Couldn't you just trim the hash to the length you wish?
$tinyURL = substr(md5($longURL . time()),0,4);
Granted, this may not provide as much pseudo randomness as using the entire string length. But, if you hash the long URL concatenated with the time(), wouldn't this be sufficient? Thoughts on using this method? Thanks!