Encryption increase possibility of corruption of file?

I was wondering if anyone has seen that encryption increases the
possibility of corrupting files. In other words, would anyone say
before one encrypts important files, one should weigh the possibilty
that there is an increased likelihood of losing the data due to
corruption?

rinmanb70

rinmanb70 wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone has seen that encryption increases the
> possibility of corrupting files. In other words, would anyone say
> before one encrypts important files, one should weigh the possibilty
> that there is an increased likelihood of losing the data due to
> corruption?

Corruption and losing data are two different things.

Encryption only increases file size negligibly, therefore corruption is
about no more likely.

But as encryption obfuscates obvious redundancy, loss of data due to the
failure of recovery is more likely. The same also holds for compression
and lossy irrelevancy elimination. Pretty non-redundant data have about
the same chances of data loss as encrypted data.

Sebastian Gottschalk

Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:

> Corruption and losing data are two different things.

I probably wasn't clear in my question. What I'm asking is if
encrypting a file makes it slightly more likely over time that the file
will become corrupted versus if that file had never been encrypted.

rinmanb70

Sebastian Gottschalk <> wrote:

> rinmanb70 wrote:
> > I was wondering if anyone has seen that encryption increases the
> > possibility of corrupting files. In other words, would anyone say
> > before one encrypts important files, one should weigh the possibilty
> > that there is an increased likelihood of losing the data due to
> > corruption?
>
> Corruption and losing data are two different things.

Not where encrypted files are concerned. In many cases a change of a
single byte or bit makes the entire file inaccessible.

> Encryption only increases file size negligibly, therefore corruption
> is about no more likely.

First of all, encryption doesn't necessarily increase file size. I can
provide you examples to the contrary if you want.

Second of all, corruption of the 100th byte of a 200 byte text file
won't make the file inaccessible. The same probably can't be said for
any file encrypted by modern encryption tools.

I can provide you examples of this if you need them, also.

> But as encryption obfuscates obvious redundancy, loss of data due to
> the failure of recovery is more likely. The same also holds for
> compression and lossy irrelevancy elimination. Pretty non-redundant
> data have about the same chances of data loss as encrypted data.

You're rambling about nonsense that has nothing at all to do with what
the poster asked.

TwistyCreek

rinmanb70 wrote:

> I was wondering if anyone has seen that encryption increases the
> possibility of corrupting files. In other words, would anyone say
> before one encrypts important files, one should weigh the possibilty
> that there is an increased likelihood of losing the data due to
> corruption?

I have neither loses data or corrupted data when using encryption. If you
are having these problems I suggest you look carefully at your software...

Imhotep

--
*************************************
Pass a Net Neutrality Law in the US!!!!

Save the Internet:
http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Its our net:
http://www.itsournet.org/

*************************************

imhotep

"rinmanb70" <> wrote:

> I was wondering if anyone has seen that encryption increases the
> possibility of corrupting files. In other words, would anyone say
> before one encrypts important files, one should weigh the possibilty
> that there is an increased likelihood of losing the data due to
> corruption?

Obviously. Encryption certainly does increase the chances that some
minor file corruption could make all your data inaccessible.

The obvious solution is to make as many backups of the encrypted data
as you deem necessary.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

"rinmanb70" <> writes:

> Sebastian Gottschalk wrote:
>
>> Corruption and losing data are two different things.
>
> I probably wasn't clear in my question. What I'm asking is if
> encrypting a file makes it slightly more likely over time that the file
> will become corrupted versus if that file had never been encrypted.
>

Define corrupted? if you mean any byte changing then why would it make
any difference whether its encrypted or not? Encrypted files dont give
off a special scent which attracts disk defects you know.

Hadron Quark

Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:

> Obviously. Encryption certainly does increase the chances that some
> minor file corruption could make all your data inaccessible.
>


Here is someone who answered the question directly.

Anyone else have an opinion?

rinmanb70

On 23 Jun 2006 06:39:20 -0700, "rinmanb70" <>
wrote:

>
>Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>
>> Obviously. Encryption certainly does increase the chances that some
>> minor file corruption could make all your data inaccessible.
>>
>
>
>Here is someone who answered the question directly.
>
>Anyone else have an opinion?

Surely any file is at risk of corruption when you perform an action on
it ( opening, saving, moving etc. ) - but there's no reason to suppose
that encryption is any more or less risky...it's just another file
operation after all, and relies on the integrity of the software in
the same fashion that any other process does.

I've been using Blowfish Advanced CS to encrypt files for many years
now - decrypting a set of files at the start of the day and
re-encrypting them at the end. That's several hundred files totaling
about 100Mb, and I've never lost one yet.
If you're worried about data loss, choose an app that provides a
degree of 'fail-safe' operation, and maintain backups in the normal
way.

Regards,



--
Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
www.shwoodwind.co.uk
Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk

Stephen Howard

rinmanb70 wrote:
> Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>
>> Obviously. Encryption certainly does increase the chances that some
>> minor file corruption could make all your data inaccessible.

Layering a level of error correction codes among a file has the same
net effect for the encrypted version of the same file.

Now could someone please abstract it? Encryption only obfuscates
existing redundancy. Error correction based on reliance of existing
redundancy is none, it's just poking around.

> Anyone else have an opinion?

Hm... why haven't you set up a filter for "Borked Pseudo Mailed",
*\.invalid$ and all those bullshit postings? Makes the group more readable.

Sebastian Gottschalk