Technology

37742 readers

70 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

How much would hash digsets shortened if the whole alphabel was used (lemmy.zip)

submitted 9 months ago by sarmale@lemmy.zip to c/technology

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The sha1 hash for 64test64xa is 6779c53432b8badf049bb9d8924a5785dd887243 which is 41 characters only using hexadecimal, 10digits and 6letters. But how long it would be if it was using the whole 26 letters in the latin alphabet? What if it also differentiated between UPPER and lower cases?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] tunetardis@lemmy.ca 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You could try base64 maybe? The above would be: Z3nFNDK4ut8Em7nYkkpXhd2IckM= (28 chrs)

base64 uses A-Z, a-z, 0-9, and the + and / characters to encode 6 bits per character. That means you can encode every 3 bytes (or 6 hex) in 4 characters (since 3 * 8 bits = 4 * 6 bits). If the data are not a perfect multiple of 3 bytes, the last group of 4 characters gets padded out with = signs.

[–] abhibeckert 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

There's also a Base64URL variant that is a little more friendly in the modern world where the +/= often need escape sequences.

The first two are replaced with more sensible characters and the third is just removed entirely - do you really need padding?