Hardware

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Encryption: the unofficial discussion

0 helpful
9 replies

by the maverick phantom wanderer (formerly macoza, nodice, kp, etc.)

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

This is something that I've thought about for a long time. Knowing the skills of this community that somehow allows people of my condition (see the last paragraph) to be a member, I think the following question may be worth someone's (at TR) time:

Is there any reason why anything (be it a message, hard drive, etc.) cannot be encrypted more than once. Or is it currently impossible/ unfeasible/ impractical?

All hail Nodice the Imperious, for I demand my self-impotence (I mean self-importance) to be confirmed by the masses.

9 replies

by the scummy one

Isnt the idea of encrypting the data to secure it? If you
still believe it to be insecure after encryption, maybe a
'better' encryption SW package should be used.

I think it would be possible to encrypt 2x, but I feel it
would make it much less useful, and possibly confuse
Windows, and bring up errors more often (I may be
wrong). However, where I would not be wrong is that it
would certainly be a bit slower to use.

Next are you going to ask about using several file
compression SW to make a file size smaller???

by nicknielsen

but why? The recipient must then decrypt as often as you encrypted, making it less likely he/she will continue to the end and actually read your message. If you used multiple keys, you add another layer of complexity to the decryption process; if the keys are not used in sequence, the file will not be decrypted properly.

And you really didn't need to correct your Freudian typo... ;)

by santeewelding

This latest iteration of wings you stretch and try -- and I don't mean the subject of your post -- do you find them ill-fit yet?

When at length you do find the dihedral that works, I'd like being around to see you fly.

This discussion is closed to new replies.