Comment on Order
bastian_5@sh.itjust.works 1 year agoIf that’s true, what’s to stop someone else from just compressing it themself and opening the same attack vector?
Comment on Order
bastian_5@sh.itjust.works 1 year agoIf that’s true, what’s to stop someone else from just compressing it themself and opening the same attack vector?
harbor9964@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Compressing what themselves? Compress then encrypt leaks information about the data being encrypted if an adversary can affect some part of the data being encrypted. If the data is at rest and repeated encryptions are needed , then this isn’t a concern.
bastian_5@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Compress the encrypted data. You’re talking about encrypting compressed data, this was talking about compressing encrypted data.
bioemerl@kbin.social 1 year ago
Technically you would be fine to compress the encrypted data, but encrypted data doesn't compress well so it's not really worth your time
bastian_5@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Depends on if you’re using lossless or lossy compression. Lossless compression will usually make it bigger, because it relies entirely on data being formatted so their are common patterns or elements that can be described with fewer parts. Like, an ok compression algorithm for a book written in English and stored as Unicode would be to convert it to ASCII and have a thing that will denote Unicode if there happens to be anything that can’t convert. An encrypted version of that book would look indestinguishable from random characters, so compressing it at that point would just put that Unicode denoter before every single character, making the book end up taking more space.