tiger192,4 hash generator

You can easily generate the tiger192,4 hash

max 20MB

If your input is hexstring, you can select this to convert your hexstring to binary before hashing.
Note: hexstring must have an even length
Note: Make sure there are no leading or trailing spaces.
If the original content you've entered is not utf-8, your browser will automatically convert it to utf-8. If you choose the original encoding from here, we'll convert it before hashing.

Tiger Functions

The Tiger hash function family, introduced in 1996 by Ross Anderson and Eli Biham, is a collection of cryptographic hash functions designed for fast processing on 64-bit platforms while ensuring a high level of security. Its main purpose is to compute a compact representation (a hash) of a variable-size input message, producing a fixed-size output, typically for digital signatures, message integrity checks, and other cryptographic applications.

Overview of Tiger

The Tiger hash function processes 512-bit message blocks and produces a 192-bit hash value. This design choice reflects a balance between the need for hash compactness and the desire to minimize the risk of collisions (two different inputs producing the same output). Tiger is particularly efficient on systems that support 64-bit operations natively, making it significantly faster than its counterparts designed for 32-bit systems when it was introduced.

Design Features

Tiger's design incorporates several features that contribute to its security and efficiency:

  • 64-bit Arithmetic: By leveraging 64-bit integers, Tiger can process data more quickly on compatible architectures, allowing for higher throughput rates in cryptographic applications.
  • S-Boxes: Tiger uses a series of substitution boxes (S-Boxes) in its compression function to ensure a high degree of confusion and diffusion, two properties critical for cryptographic security. These S-Boxes are applied to the input data in a way that makes it difficult to reverse-engineer the hash or find collisions.
  • Three-pass Algorithm: The standard Tiger hash function applies its compression function in three passes over the data, enhancing its ability to resist cryptographic attacks compared to single or two-pass algorithms.


There are several variants of the Tiger hash function, including Tiger2 and versions that produce different hash sizes (such as 128-bit or 160-bit outputs). Tiger2, for instance, differs from the original Tiger primarily in the way it handles message padding, which improves its resistance to certain types of cryptographic attacks.


One of the main advantages of Tiger is its performance on 64-bit systems. Its design allows it to take full advantage of 64-bit arithmetic operations, making it faster than many other hash functions on such platforms, especially for large amounts of data. However, on 32-bit systems, its performance advantage is less pronounced.


Since its introduction, Tiger has been subjected to extensive cryptographic analysis. While all hash functions are theoretically vulnerable to brute-force attacks given enough computational power (a vulnerability that grows with advances in computing technology), Tiger has stood up well to scrutiny. No practical attacks that significantly undermine its security have been widely recognized in the cryptographic community as of my last update.


Tiger's primary applications are in areas where cryptographic hash functions are typically used: securing digital signatures, ensuring the integrity of messages or documents, and in various protocols where a secure and efficient hash function is required. Its advantage on 64-bit systems makes it particularly well-suited for applications where large data volumes are processed on modern hardware.


The Tiger hash function family represents a significant contribution to the field of cryptography, offering a blend of security and performance, especially in environments that can leverage its 64-bit design. While newer hash functions have been developed since Tiger's introduction, its design principles and performance characteristics continue to make it a relevant choice in specific cryptographic contexts.