Filename length 
Full encryption increases filename lengths a lot, and a number of cloud services have limits on the size of names. I hit this problem first time I tried to backup some of my files. So I created obfuscate as a weak alternative but one that (normally) only minimally increases the length of the filename. Standard filename encryption is relatively strong. Obfuscation is very weak (no way is it cryptographically sound! But it's not meant to be) but hopefully sufficient to avoid obvious scanning and hopefully won't cause as many hits to filename limits as I got with standard.
1 Like
sorry, my brain was obfuscated,
i needed sleep to decrypt it.
thanks
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
hi @sweh, i am confused about the meaning and implication of
some unicode based filenames that the obfuscation is weak and may map lower case characters to upper case equivalents
does that mean, in some cases, filenames can be corrupted?
so that when i decrypt a file, the decrypted filename might not match the original filename?
or what?
What it means is that the resulting “obfuscated” filename may not really be that well obfuscated.
Filenames aren’t corrupted but it might be easy for someone looking at it to guess what the original name was.
Let’s take simple ASCII; assume the original filename is “hello.txt”. If the obfuscation replaced that with “224.HELLO.TXT” then it’d be clear that this isn’t very well obfuscated. Well, for ASCII there are plain simple rules so the code can avoid this. BUT the rules aren’t there for full Unicode; the obfuscation can map a lower case unicode character to an upper case character. The chances of this happening are small, and for it to happen for a whole word is even smaller. But it’s just an example of how obfuscation is weak.
1 Like
thanks for the quick answer.