bulk-extractor
v2.2.0 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on bulk-extractor's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
bulk_extractor is a digital forensics tool that scans disk images and files to extract structured information such as email addresses and credit card numbers.
bulk_extractor -S jpeg_carve_mode=2 <image> bulk_extractor -F '[a-z]*@company.com' disk.img bulk_extractor -eoutlook disk.img bulk_extractor -S carve_tcp <target_image> bulk_extractor -Y 2011-11-01:00:00:00-2011-11-02:00:00:00 image.img bulk_extractor -A 1000000 image.img bulk_extractor -Z -s <session> <image> bulk_extractor -Y <start_offset> <target> bulk_extractor -f result/ diskimage.img && grep MD5 result/report.xml bulk_extractor -C 4096 -o output /path/to/image bulk_extractor -r <image_file>
Summary
bulk-extractor is an open-source digital forensics tool that scans disk images, files, or directories byte-by-byte to extract structured evidence such as email addresses, credit card numbers, JPEGs, and JSON snippets without parsing file system structures, and it decodes and recursively re-examines compressed or encoded data that carving tools built around file systems tend to miss. It runs from the command line, built from source or installed from a tagged release, producing text output and feature histograms suited to indexing and further processing. It is aimed at forensic examiners and law enforcement investigators doing evidence extraction rather than live incident response. Development dates to 2012 and has drawn 55 contributors, though activity has slowed to 21 commits in the past year with its last release over two years ago, worth weighing before adopting it for production casework.
bulk_extractor is a digital forensics tool that scans disk images and files to extract structured information such as email addresses and credit card numbers.
How bulk-extractor helps
What email addresses, credit card numbers, and other identifiers are hiding in this disk image?
scans every byte of the input and writes out structured feature files listing each address, number, or identifier found, regardless of where it sits in the file system
Is there evidence in this image that a file-system-aware carving tool would have missed?
probes each byte position for the start of a compressed or encoded sequence, decodes it, and recursively re-examines the result, surfacing things like base64-encoded JPEGs or compressed JSON buried inside other files
Which search terms or contacts show up most across this evidence, and how often?
builds histograms of features such as Google search terms and email addresses, letting an investigator spot the most frequent or unusual entries without reading every hit
Can I pull evidence out of a deleted or corrupted partition without a working file system?
reads the input as a raw byte stream rather than parsing file system structures, so it still extracts features even when directory entries or metadata are damaged or absent
How much duplicate content is padding out my results from a recursive extraction?
applies a configurable deduplication mode that skips buffers whose content hash was already seen, shrinking processing time and output size at the cost of possibly losing some recursive paths to identical content
Where do I start rescanning a large image after an interrupted run?
accepts a starting page number so scanning can resume partway through the input instead of restarting from the beginning
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for bulk-extractor, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail bulk-extractor puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
22 entries
No entries match these filters.
- August 20261
- January 20261
- April 20241
- January 20241
- November 20191
- August 20131
- July 20131
- November 20112
- September 20112
- June 20111
- May 20111
- February 20111
- December 20103
- November 20102
- August 20101
- July 20101
- April 20101
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in simsong/bulk_extractor, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 4 +1 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 2 +4 joined · −2 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 12% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 3.3 years first maintainer reply 2.6 days
- Open backlog 65 of 349 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 65
- Contributors / month 2
- Commits / month 2
- Stars 1,422
- bugs 23%
- features 8%
- docs 2%
- other 67%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.