3 ms·
They were probably expecting base64 encoded binary data. Base64-encoded-binary-inside-Base64-encoded-JSON-inside-JSON is a really strange construction if you ha
by creatonez 1y ago
They were probably expecting base64 encoded binary data. Base64-encoded-binary-inside-Base64-encoded-JSON-inside-JSON is a really strange construction if you haven't encountered it before, because of how much space it's wasting playing a game of Russian nesting dolls.
- fc417fc802 1y agoJust add a layer of compression periodically to reclaim the wasted space and it will all work out.
- throwaway4496 1y agoIf you have a compression that works on encrypted data, you can avoid wasting your time on the "encryption".
- fc417fc802 1y agoBase64 isn't encryption. The overhead added follows an extremely predictable pattern. That said I've no idea what the performance of common compression algorithms might be in such a use case. The comment was entirely tongue in cheek.
- throwaway4496 1y agoI apologise for my mistake. Either the comment got edited or I misread encryption somewhere in there.