Path: csiph.com!optima2.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!not-for-mail From: Grant Edwards Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Pure Python Data Mangling or Encrypting Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: <558a9649$0$1675$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67-130-15-94.dia.static.qwest.net X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1435170598 8520 67.130.15.94 (24 Jun 2015 18:29:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 18:29:58 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:93095 On 2015-06-24, Randall Smith wrote: > On 06/24/2015 06:36 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> I don't understand how mangling the data is supposed to protect the >> recipient. Don't they have the ability unmangle the data, and thus >> expose themselves to whatever nasties are in the files? > > They never look at the data and wouldn't care to unmangle it. I obviously don't "get it". If the recipient is never going look at the data or unmangle it, why not convert every received file to a single null byte? That way you save on disk space as well -- especially if you just create links for all files after the initial one. ;) [I supposed next you're going to tell me that Windows filesystems don't support links.] > The purpose is primarily to prevent automated software (file > indexers, virus scanners) from doing bad things to the data. Life under windows must be more tiresome than I imagined (or could imagine) if you have to jump through such hoops to keep "automated software" from doing bad things to your data files. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! My mind is making at ashtrays in Dayton ... gmail.com