Technology

37712 readers

541 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

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

Los@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

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@beehaw.org

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

[–] rnd@beehaw.org 3 points 9 months ago

If you're using Linux (or macOS or MinGW or CygWin or MSYS), you can do something like this in the terminal:

xxd -r -ps | base64

The first command will read the standard input and decode hex strings back into raw data, and the second one will do base64 to the output.

If I pass the hex string mentioned in your original post through this command, I get:

Z3nFNDK4ut8Em7nYkkpXhd2IckM=