Encrypting then Base64 Encoding
I notice online encryption tools encrypt the plaintext and output the ciphertext in base64 format. Why is ciphertext outputted in base64 format? Can the ciphertext be outputted in binary format?
encryption cryptography
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
add a comment |
I notice online encryption tools encrypt the plaintext and output the ciphertext in base64 format. Why is ciphertext outputted in base64 format? Can the ciphertext be outputted in binary format?
encryption cryptography
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
1
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago
add a comment |
I notice online encryption tools encrypt the plaintext and output the ciphertext in base64 format. Why is ciphertext outputted in base64 format? Can the ciphertext be outputted in binary format?
encryption cryptography
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
I notice online encryption tools encrypt the plaintext and output the ciphertext in base64 format. Why is ciphertext outputted in base64 format? Can the ciphertext be outputted in binary format?
encryption cryptography
encryption cryptography
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
asked 2 days ago
Angela LipfordAngela Lipford
353
353
1
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago
add a comment |
1
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago
1
1
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Ciphertext can be output in binary format. For example, gpg defaults to binary format, and you need to specify --armor to make it base64:
--armor
-a
Create ASCII armored output. The default is to create the binary OpenPGP format.
The reason you see ASCII/base64 more often is that it is easier to transfer and manipulate than binary. SMTP email, for example, cannot handle binary data without encoding it, so having a non-binary format makes it simpler to email encrypted text. FTP may default to non-binary mode which will introduce errors when transferring a binary file. Even something as simple as popping open a file in an editor to make sure it "looks like it's there" is easier with non-binary formats.
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
add a comment |
A web browser has to print a visual representation of the binary data. The usual visual representation of binary data is the hexadecimal notation.
Now observe: The space overhead of hex-encoded data is factor 2 (we need 2 ascii characters for one byte).
The space overhead of base64-encoded data is only 1.33, making it more space-efficient than hex-encoded data.
Moreover, I suspect that the tool support for base64-encoded data is at least as good as for hex-encoded data.
For instance, you can copy-paste a base64-encoded ciphertext directly into a PEM file.
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "162"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205536%2fencrypting-then-base64-encoding%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Ciphertext can be output in binary format. For example, gpg defaults to binary format, and you need to specify --armor to make it base64:
--armor
-a
Create ASCII armored output. The default is to create the binary OpenPGP format.
The reason you see ASCII/base64 more often is that it is easier to transfer and manipulate than binary. SMTP email, for example, cannot handle binary data without encoding it, so having a non-binary format makes it simpler to email encrypted text. FTP may default to non-binary mode which will introduce errors when transferring a binary file. Even something as simple as popping open a file in an editor to make sure it "looks like it's there" is easier with non-binary formats.
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
add a comment |
Ciphertext can be output in binary format. For example, gpg defaults to binary format, and you need to specify --armor to make it base64:
--armor
-a
Create ASCII armored output. The default is to create the binary OpenPGP format.
The reason you see ASCII/base64 more often is that it is easier to transfer and manipulate than binary. SMTP email, for example, cannot handle binary data without encoding it, so having a non-binary format makes it simpler to email encrypted text. FTP may default to non-binary mode which will introduce errors when transferring a binary file. Even something as simple as popping open a file in an editor to make sure it "looks like it's there" is easier with non-binary formats.
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
add a comment |
Ciphertext can be output in binary format. For example, gpg defaults to binary format, and you need to specify --armor to make it base64:
--armor
-a
Create ASCII armored output. The default is to create the binary OpenPGP format.
The reason you see ASCII/base64 more often is that it is easier to transfer and manipulate than binary. SMTP email, for example, cannot handle binary data without encoding it, so having a non-binary format makes it simpler to email encrypted text. FTP may default to non-binary mode which will introduce errors when transferring a binary file. Even something as simple as popping open a file in an editor to make sure it "looks like it's there" is easier with non-binary formats.
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
Ciphertext can be output in binary format. For example, gpg defaults to binary format, and you need to specify --armor to make it base64:
--armor
-a
Create ASCII armored output. The default is to create the binary OpenPGP format.
The reason you see ASCII/base64 more often is that it is easier to transfer and manipulate than binary. SMTP email, for example, cannot handle binary data without encoding it, so having a non-binary format makes it simpler to email encrypted text. FTP may default to non-binary mode which will introduce errors when transferring a binary file. Even something as simple as popping open a file in an editor to make sure it "looks like it's there" is easier with non-binary formats.
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
answered 2 days ago
gowenfawrgowenfawr
53.7k11114159
53.7k11114159
add a comment |
add a comment |
A web browser has to print a visual representation of the binary data. The usual visual representation of binary data is the hexadecimal notation.
Now observe: The space overhead of hex-encoded data is factor 2 (we need 2 ascii characters for one byte).
The space overhead of base64-encoded data is only 1.33, making it more space-efficient than hex-encoded data.
Moreover, I suspect that the tool support for base64-encoded data is at least as good as for hex-encoded data.
For instance, you can copy-paste a base64-encoded ciphertext directly into a PEM file.
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
add a comment |
A web browser has to print a visual representation of the binary data. The usual visual representation of binary data is the hexadecimal notation.
Now observe: The space overhead of hex-encoded data is factor 2 (we need 2 ascii characters for one byte).
The space overhead of base64-encoded data is only 1.33, making it more space-efficient than hex-encoded data.
Moreover, I suspect that the tool support for base64-encoded data is at least as good as for hex-encoded data.
For instance, you can copy-paste a base64-encoded ciphertext directly into a PEM file.
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
add a comment |
A web browser has to print a visual representation of the binary data. The usual visual representation of binary data is the hexadecimal notation.
Now observe: The space overhead of hex-encoded data is factor 2 (we need 2 ascii characters for one byte).
The space overhead of base64-encoded data is only 1.33, making it more space-efficient than hex-encoded data.
Moreover, I suspect that the tool support for base64-encoded data is at least as good as for hex-encoded data.
For instance, you can copy-paste a base64-encoded ciphertext directly into a PEM file.
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
A web browser has to print a visual representation of the binary data. The usual visual representation of binary data is the hexadecimal notation.
Now observe: The space overhead of hex-encoded data is factor 2 (we need 2 ascii characters for one byte).
The space overhead of base64-encoded data is only 1.33, making it more space-efficient than hex-encoded data.
Moreover, I suspect that the tool support for base64-encoded data is at least as good as for hex-encoded data.
For instance, you can copy-paste a base64-encoded ciphertext directly into a PEM file.
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
answered 2 days ago
Mike76Mike76
17219
17219
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Information Security Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f205536%2fencrypting-then-base64-encoding%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
You can translate that data into any base, it just happens that Base64 is well suited for the web; it's composed of characters that are safe to use in URLs.
– meagar
2 days ago
it avoids issue with special, reserved, and control characters, allowing the ciphertext to use all 255 combos per byte.
– dandavis
11 hours ago