Guide
File hash versus text hash: which SHA-256 page to use
Explains when to hash pasted strings versus local files on salamyx.com and points to the hash comparison guide in Crypto for algorithm choices.
SHA-256 for pasted text
Use the SHA-256 text tool when your input is a string or blob you can paste: release notes, config snippets, or quick equality checks.
The page is optimized for interactive hashing without uploading a file object.
File hash for local binaries
Use the file hash tool when the artifact is a document, installer, or dataset on disk and you want a checksum workflow without sending bytes to a server.
Large files are still constrained by browser memory; chunk or use dedicated desktop tooling for huge objects.
Algorithm education: hash comparison
When you are choosing between MD5, SHA-256, or newer options for a policy decision, read the hash comparison guide in the Crypto section for practical tradeoffs—not for legal compliance text.
Common mistakes
Hashing the filename instead of contents, mixing hex and Base64 representations, or comparing hashes computed with different newline normalizations.
Crypto tools
FAQ
Can I hash a file by pasting its path?
No. Paths are not file contents. Use the file hash tool so the browser reads bytes from your selection.
Why do two tools both say SHA-256?
Same algorithm, different input channel: typed/pasted text versus picked files.
Is file hashing zero-risk?
It reduces server upload risk but does not remove local malware or user error. Always verify what you are hashing.
Should I still use MD5 anywhere?
Only for compatibility with legacy checksum ecosystems—not for new security decisions.
Do hashes prove authenticity?
They prove content matched at hash time. Authenticity needs signing, trusted channels, or chain-of-custody beyond a bare hash.