Recommended Posts

Just found this little file on one of my storage drives, and remember having a bit of fun with it years ago

The file is a tiny 78kB, extract it using 7zip to find the extracted file is now 21MB, now extract that file and you`ll see that the extracted file is now 2.8GB

How many times can you extract Googolplex before you or your machine gives up ? :D

Apparently there is a file hidden at the very end of all of the extractions but I have never managed to get that far, from what I remember it is a text file containing the entire numerical value of a Googolplex

Download (Extract each file with 7zip)

http://localhostr.co...G/googolplex.gz

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1122198-googolplex-how-far-can-you-get/
Share on other sites

Why post this? Its not a malicious file at all, it does nothing to your AV, there is no executable file at all

And it doesn't try to kill your system with a huge decompression, each extraction gets bigger and you can choose to cancel the extraction at any point

Read the wiki it will show why he did it

Most Anti Virus should not allow you to do this as it "should" pick it up as a zip bomb because of the way it exponentially increases in size

Read the wiki it will show why he did it

Most Anti Virus should not allow you to do this as it "should" pick it up as a zip bomb because of the way it exponentially increases in size

I did read it, Its not a zip bomb

You don't suddenly get 100 Petabytes trying to decompress, each time you extract the file it gets bigger and offers no harm to the machine at all, it doesn't try to crash your system whatsoever

I did read it, Its not a zip bomb

You don't suddenly get 100 Petabytes trying to decompress, each time you extract the file it gets bigger and offers no harm to the machine at all, it doesn't try to crash your system whatsoever

Yes, if you manually extract it the file doesn't expand until you initiate the next nested level, but the the same wouldn't be true for an AV program. For the AV it would initiate the next step automatically in order to ensure the contents of the file are safe. As a result, it would continue going down a level until it exploded.

  • Like 1

Assume a text file with 1 byte per character, the numerical value of a Googolplex would be (1e100) + 1 bytes which is ten duotrigintillion bytes or 9.095e87 terabyes. There isn't enough digital storage on earth to hold this value.

  • Like 1

Yes, if you manually extract it the file doesn't expand until you initiate the next nested level, but the the same wouldn't be true for an AV program. For the AV it would initiate the next step automatically in order to ensure the contents of the file are safe. As a result, it would continue going down a level until it exploded.

There are no file extensions on any of the nested levels, probably to prevent that happening

You dont understand whats being said

AV will auto scan the next level will see its also a zip and scan the next level, will see its a zip and scan the next level will see its a zip and scan the next level

it will continue to do this thus is scanning a bigger and bigger file each time it does this

You dont understand whats being said

AV will auto scan the next level will see its also a zip and scan the next level, will see its a zip and scan the next level will see its a zip and scan the next level

it will continue to do this thus is scanning a bigger and bigger file each time it does this

Funny, every time I ever extracted this, on many machines, with many other people also having a go, not once with different AVs did it cause any problems

Don't like it, don't download it, I wouldn't post any file that would cause problems

Funny, every time I ever extracted this, on many machines, with many other people also having a go, not once with different AVs did it cause any problems

Don't like it, don't download it, I wouldn't post any file that would cause problems

Then you guys had AV software that's actually worth a cent.

A good AV scanner should always stop after a certain time to not trick itself into zip bombs.

Apparently this isn't standard by now? Lord in heaven...

Glassed Silver:mac

I just tried expanding the first level (which produced several .zip files) and Windows (SearchFilterHost.exe) started using all my 8GB of RAM.

I had to terminate the Search Indexer process and then delete the .zip files via the command line.

Pretty scary stuff!

interesting...I've never seen this type of thing before. If I have time later tonight, maybe I'll write a little java program to extract it. It should be easy to extract each layer in memory and just discard each byte as it's read. that way, it wouldn't matter how large the file is. You could just let your cpu churn away. Has anyone tried this just for giggles?

edit: haha what am I talking about. this would never work. I'd run of memory during the extraction. ignore my entire idiotic comment

Then you guys had AV software that's actually worth a cent.

A good AV scanner should always stop after a certain time to not trick itself into zip bombs.

Apparently this isn't standard by now? Lord in heaven...

Glassed Silver:mac

I`m using NOD32 and it gives the all clear, and as you saw in VirusTotals scan, 0% of all scanners found any issues / zip bomb

Previous AVs I've used include Avast and Avira <<< High FP detection rate too but nothing

I just tried expanding the first level (which produced several .zip files) and Windows (SearchFilterHost.exe) started using all my 8GB of RAM. I had to terminate the Search Indexer process and then delete the .zip files via the command line. Pretty scary stuff!

There is only 1 file per extraction, the first = 21MB only

interesting...I've never seen this type of thing before. If I have time later tonight, maybe I'll write a little java program to extract it. It should be easy to extract each layer in memory and just discard each byte as it's read. that way, it wouldn't matter how large the file is. You could just let your cpu churn away. Has anyone tried this just for giggles?

edit: haha what am I talking about. this would never work. I'd run of memory during the extraction. ignore my entire idiotic comment

I remember when I first found this, someone did something similar to what you are thinking, managed to partially extract all of the layers and found the txt file at the end - which is how I know what is in there

  • Like 2

Assume a text file with 1 byte per character, the numerical value of a Googolplex would be (1e100) + 1 bytes which is ten duotrigintillion bytes or 9.095e87 terabyes. There isn't enough digital storage on earth to hold this value.

To expand on this, the volume of the Earth is roughly equivalent to the volume occupied by 2.87e24 3.5" hard drives.

Let's say you stored the .txt file across 1 petabyte 3.5" hard drives (don't exist, but pretend they do) you would still need 8.882e84 hard drives, which would take up a volume of space approximately 1e63 times that of earth itself, if my math is correct.

I remember when I first found this, someone did something similar to what you are thinking, managed to partially extract all of the layers and found the txt file at the end - which is how I know what is in there

yea actually, it looks like it should be possible to do that. Java has a class called ZipInputStream (http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.4.2/docs/api/java/util/zip/ZipInputStream.html) that can read a stream of bytes and inflate it. He probably had a method to inflate a few bytes into a buffer and then make a recursive call with that buffer. You'd have to make sure there aren't so many recursive calls that you'd get a stack overflow, but eventually, you'd get to the inner most level.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • I'm not unblocking my camera for this crapola. Sorry, Google.
    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      258
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!