So while on my way to HACK THE WORLD, I came across two .exe to hax SQL: SQL_MemCorrupt and SQLBufferOverflow. My first wonder was if one was better than the other.

To do so I needed to hack a server with a SQL port, and if that server had a tracker: I could use it to time the programs. I ended up using the /el message board server.



I Started analyzing the firewall, solved it, deconnected, started up TraceKill then connected to the server again and proceeded to overload the proxy with the tracker stuck at 100.00 as pictured above.

Once the Proxy was dealt with it was time to wip out my 1337sqlHAX.

SQL_MemCorrupt:
unlocks between 77.7 and 75.3 (Excluded screens)
finishes around 73.6 (as seen above)
total RAM: 350

SQLBufferOverflow
unlocks port between 78.5 and 75.9
finishes process around 74.2
RAM: 350

Ram usage being identical, the only difference is speed: We see here SQLBufferOverflow around 0.6s faster. Not much, but could make or break for some missions like the "Test of Haste".
But the difference seemed likely to be Human Error so....

SQL_MemCorrput
Unlock Between 78.8 and 75.8
Finishes around 74.7

Half a second faster again. Human Error no doubt. Both progams seem to be equal, so if you have both get rid of one to speed things up when using auto-complete.
Both are relatively long but take less than 30 secs, and testing showed them to be close to within a second.

tl;dr:
So a pointless guide to a question that could be answered in one line: The is no difference between SQLBufferOverflow and SQL_MenCorrupt.