just wondering why we can’t just optionally include the checksum in the hash on the file name itself for crypt. I realize this would cause people to have to re-upload crypt files with the new hash (or have a renaming utility to fix/rename the names).
So you mean use the file name as extra space to store metadata - the md5sum being part of it… Not thought of that before.
You’d want the md5sum to be encrypted otherwise you would reveal info about the plaintext.
I think the disadvantages would be
- it would make the filename even longer - we already have lots of troubles with that
- it would make finding an individual file harder (eg rclone copy secret:file .)
It is a good idea though - not one I’d had before - thanks for sharing the insight.