I've heard people talking about "base 64 encoding" here and there. What is it used for?
When you have some binary data that you want to ship across a network, you generally don't do it by just streaming the bits and bytes over the wire in a raw format. Why? because some media are made for streaming text. You never know -- some protocols may interpret your binary data as control characters (like a modem), or your binary data could be screwed up because the underlying protocol might think that you've entered a special character combination (like how FTP translates line endings).
So to get around this, people encode the binary data into characters. Base64 is one of these types of encodings.
Why 64?
Because you can generally rely on the same 64 characters being present in many character sets, and you can be reasonably confident that your data's going to end up on the other side of the wire uncorrupted.
It's basically a way of encoding arbitrary binary data in ASCII text. It takes 4 characters per 3 bytes of data, plus potentially a bit of padding at the end.
Essentially each 6 bits of the input is encoded in a 64-character alphabet. The "standard" alphabet uses A-Z, a-z, 0-9 and + and /, with = as a padding character. There are URL-safe variants.
Wikipedia is a reasonably good source of more information.
Years ago, when mailing functionality was introduced, so that was utterly text based, as the time passed, need for attachments like image and media (audio,video etc) came into existence. When these attachments are sent over internet (which is basically in the form of binary data), the probability of binary data getting corrupt is high in its raw form. So, to tackle this problem BASE64 came along.
The problem with binary data is that it contains null characters which in some languages like C,C++ represent end of character string so sending binary data in raw form containing NULL bytes will stop a file from being fully read and lead in a corrupt data.
For Example :
In C and C++, this "null" character shows the end of a string. So "HELLO" is stored like this:
H E L L O
72 69 76 76 79 00
The 00 says "stop here".
Now let’s dive into how BASE64 encoding works.
Point to be noted : Length of the string should be in multiple of 3.
Example 1 :
String to be encoded : “ace”, Length=3
Convert each character to decimal.
a= 97, c= 99, e= 101
Change each decimal to 8-bit binary representation.
97= 01100001, 99= 01100011, 101= 01100101
Combined : 01100001 01100011 01100101
Separate in a group of 6-bit.
011000 010110 001101 100101
Calculate binary to decimal
011000= 24, 010110= 22, 001101= 13, 100101= 37
Covert decimal characters to base64 using base64 chart.
24= Y, 22= W, 13= N, 37= l
“ace” => “YWNl”
Example 2 :
String to be encoded : “abcd” Length=4, it's not multiple of 3. So to make string length multiple of 3 , we must add 2 bit padding to make length= 6. Padding bit is represented by “=” sign.
Point to be noted : One padding bit equals two zeroes 00 so two padding bit equals four zeroes 0000.
So lets start the process :–
Convert each character to decimal.
a= 97, b= 98, c= 99, d= 100
Change each decimal to 8-bit binary representation.
97= 01100001, 98= 01100010, 99= 01100011, 100= 01100100
Separate in a group of 6-bit.
011000, 010110, 001001, 100011, 011001, 00
so the last 6-bit is not complete so we insert two padding bit which equals four zeroes “0000”.
011000, 010110, 001001, 100011, 011001, 000000 ==
Now, it is equal. Two equals sign at the end show that 4 zeroes were added (helps in decoding).
Calculate binary to decimal.
011000= 24, 010110= 22, 001001= 9, 100011= 35, 011001= 25, 000000=0 ==
Covert decimal characters to base64 using base64 chart.
24= Y, 22= W, 9= j, 35= j, 25= Z, 0= A ==
“abcd” => “YWJjZA==”
Base-64 encoding is a way of taking binary data and turning it into text so that it's more easily transmitted in things like e-mail and HTML form data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64
It's a textual encoding of binary data where the resultant text has nothing but letters, numbers and the symbols "+", "/" and "=". It's a convenient way to store/transmit binary data over media that is specifically used for textual data.
But why Base-64? The two alternatives for converting binary data into text that immediately spring to mind are:
Decimal: store the decimal value of each byte as three numbers: 045 112 101 037 etc. where each byte is represented by 3 bytes. The data bloats three-fold.
Hexadecimal: store the bytes as hex pairs: AC 47 0D 1A etc. where each byte is represented by 2 bytes. The data bloats two-fold.
Base-64 maps 3 bytes (8 x 3 = 24 bits) in 4 characters that span 6-bits (6 x 4 = 24 bits). The result looks something like "TWFuIGlzIGRpc3Rpb...". Therefore the bloating is only a mere 4/3 = 1.3333333 times the original.
Aside from what's already been said, two very common uses that have not been listed are
Hashes:
Hashes are one-way functions that transform a block of bytes into another block of bytes of a fixed size such as 128bit or 256bit (SHA/MD5). Converting the resulting bytes into Base64 makes it much easier to display the hash especially when you are comparing a checksum for integrity. Hashes are so often seen in Base64 that many people mistake Base64 itself as a hash.
Cryptography:
Since an encryption key does not have to be text but raw bytes it is sometimes necessary to store it in a file or database, which Base64 comes in handy for. Same with the resulting encrypted bytes.
Note that although Base64 is often used in cryptography is not a security mechanism. Anyone can convert the Base64 string back to its original bytes, so it should not be used as a means for protecting data, only as a format to display or store raw bytes more easily.
Certificates
x509 certificates in PEM format are base 64 encoded. http://how2ssl.com/articles/working_with_pem_files/
In the early days of computers, when telephone line inter-system communication was not particularly reliable, a quick & dirty method of verifying data integrity was used: "bit parity". In this method, every byte transmitted would have 7-bits of data, and the 8th would be 1 or 0, to force the total number of 1 bits in the byte to be even.
Hence 0x01 would be transmited as 0x81; 0x02 would be 0x82; 0x03 would remain 0x03 etc.
To further this system, when the ASCII character set was defined, only 00-7F were assigned characters. (Still today, all characters set in the range 80-FF are non-standard)
Many routers of the day put the parity check and byte translation into hardware, forcing the computers attached to them to deal strictly with 7-bit data. This force email attachments (and all other data, which is why HTTP & SMTP protocols are text-based), to be convert into a text-only format.
Few of the routers survived into the 90s. I severely doubt any of them are in use today.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64
The term Base64 refers to a specific MIME content transfer encoding.
It is also used as a generic term for any similar encoding scheme that
encodes binary data by treating it numerically and translating it into
a base 64 representation. The particular choice of base is due to the
history of character set encoding: one can choose a set of 64
characters that is both part of the subset common to most encodings,
and also printable. This combination leaves the data unlikely to be
modified in transit through systems, such as email, which were
traditionally not 8-bit clean.
Base64 can be used in a variety of contexts:
Evolution and Thunderbird use Base64 to obfuscate e-mail passwords[1]
Base64 can be used to transmit and store text that might otherwise cause delimiter collision
Base64 is often used as a quick but insecure shortcut to obscure secrets without incurring the overhead of cryptographic key management
Spammers use Base64 to evade basic anti-spamming tools, which often do not decode Base64 and therefore cannot detect keywords in encoded
messages.
Base64 is used to encode character strings in LDIF files
Base64 is sometimes used to embed binary data in an XML file, using a syntax similar to ...... e.g.
Firefox's bookmarks.html.
Base64 is also used when communicating with government Fiscal Signature printing devices (usually, over serial or parallel ports) to
minimize the delay when transferring receipt characters for signing.
Base64 is used to encode binary files such as images within scripts, to avoid depending on external files.
Can be used to embed raw image data into a CSS property such as background-image.
Some transportation protocols only allow alphanumerical characters to be transmitted. Just imagine a situation where control characters are used to trigger special actions and/or that only supports a limited bit width per character. Base64 transforms any input into an encoding that only uses alphanumeric characters, +, / and the = as a padding character.
Base64 is a binary to a text encoding scheme that represents binary data in an ASCII string format. It is designed to carry data stored in binary format across the network channels.
Base64 mechanism uses 64 characters to encode. These characters consist of:
10 numeric value: i.e., 0,1,2,3,...,9
26 Uppercase alphabets: i.e., A,B,C,D,...,Z
26 Lowercase alphabets: i.e., a,b,c,d,...,z
2 special characters (these characters depends on operating system): i.e. +,/
How base64 works
The steps to encode a string with base64 algorithm are as follow:
Count the number of characters in a String. If it is not multiple of 3, then pad it with special characters (i.e. =) to make it multiple of 3.
Convert string to ASCII binary format 8-bit using the ASCII table.
After converting to binary format, divide binary data into chunks of 6-bits.
Convert chunks of 6-bit binary data to decimal numbers.
Convert decimals to string according to the base64 Index Table. This table can be an example, but as I said, 2 special characters may vary.
Now, we got the encoded version of the input string.
Let's make an example: convert string THS to base64 encoding string.
Count the number of characters: it is already a multiple of 3.
Convert to ASCII binary format 8-bit. We got (T)01010100 (H)01001000 (S)01010011
Divide binary data into chunks of 6-bits. We got 010101 000100 100001 010011
Convert chunks of 6-bit binary data to decimal numbers.We got 21 4 33 19
Convert decimals to string according to the base64 Index Table. We got VEhT
It's used for converting arbitrary binary data to ASCII text.
For example, e-mail attachments are sent this way.
“Base64 encoding schemes are commonly used when there is a need to encode binary data that needs be stored and transferred over media that are designed to deal with textual data. This is to ensure that the data remains intact without modification during transport”(Wiki, 2017)
Example could be the following: you have a web service that accept only ASCII chars. You want to save and then transfer user’s data to some other location (API) but recipient want receive untouched data. Base64 is for that. . . The only downside is that base64 encoding will require around 33% more space than regular strings.
Another Example:: uenc = url encoded = aHR0cDovL2xvYy5tYWdlbnRvLmNvbS9hc2ljcy1tZW4tcy1nZWwta2F5YW5vLXhpaS5odG1s = http://loc.querytip.com/asics-men-s-gel-kayano-xii.html.
As you can see we can’t put char “/” in URL if we want to send last visited URL as parameter because we would break attribute/value rule for “MOD rewrite” – GET parameter.
A full example would be: “http://loc.querytip.com/checkout/cart/add/uenc/http://loc.magento.com/asics-men-s-gel-kayano-xii.html/product/93/”
I use it in a practical sense when we transfer large binary objects (images) via web services. So when I am testing a C# web service using a python script, the binary object can be recreated with a little magic.
[In python]
import base64
imageAsBytes = base64.b64decode( dataFromWS )
The usage of Base64 I'm going to describe here is somewhat a hack. So if you don't like hacks, please do not go on.
I went into trouble when I discovered that MySQL's utf8 does not support 4-byte unicode characters since it uses a 3-byte version of utf8. So what I did to support full 4-byte unicode over MySQL's utf8? Well, base64 encode strings when storing into the database and base64 decode when retrieving.
Since base64 encoding and decoding is very fast, the above worked perfectly.
You have the following points to take note of:
Base64 encoding uses 33% more storage
Strings stored in the database wont be human readable (You could sell that as a feature that database strings use a basic form of encryption).
You could use the above method for any storage engine that does not support unicode.
Mostly, I've seen it used to encode binary data in contexts that can only handle ascii - or a simple - character sets.
The base64 is a binary to a text encoding scheme that represents binary data in an ASCII string format. base64 is designed to carry data stored in binary format across the channels. It takes any form of data and transforms it into a long string of plain text. Earlier we can not transfer a large amount of data like files because it is made up of 2⁸ bit bytes but our actual network uses 2⁷ bit bytes. This is where base64 encoding came into the picture. But, what actually does base64 mean?
let’s understand the meaning of base64.
base64 = base+64
we can call base64 as a radix-64 representation.base64 uses only 6-bits(2⁶ = 64 characters) to ensure the printable data is human readable. but, how? we can also write base65 or base78, but why only 64? let’s prove it.
base64 encoding contains 64 characters to encode any string.
base64 contains:
10 numeric value i.e., 0,1,2,3,…..9.
26 Uppercase alphabets i.e., A,B,C,D,…….Z.
26 Lowercase alphabets i.e., a,b,c,d,……..z.
two special characters i.e., +,/. Depends upon your OS.
The steps followed by the base64 algorithm are as follow:
count the number of characters in a String.
If it is not multiple of 3 pad with special character i.e., = to
make it multiple of 3.
Encode the string in ASCII format.
Now, it will convert the ASCII to binary format 8-bit each.
After converting to binary format, it will divide binary data into
chunks of 6-bits each.
The chunks of 6-bit binary data will now be converted to decimal
number format.
Using the base64 Index Table, the decimals will be again converted
to a string according to the table format.
Finally, we will get the encoded version of our input string.
To expand a bit on what Brad is saying: many transport mechanisms for email and Usenet and other ways of moving data are not "8 bit clean", which means that characters outside the standard ascii character set might be mangled in transit - for instance, 0x0D might be seen as a carriage return, and turned into a carriage return and line feed. Base 64 maps all the binary characters into several standard ascii letters and numbers and punctuation so they won't be mangled this way.
One hexadecimal digit is of one nibble (4 bits). Two nibbles make 8 bits which are also called 1 byte.
MD5 generates a 128-bit output which is represented using a sequence of 32 hexadecimal digits, which in turn are 32*4=128 bits. 128 bits make 16 bytes (since 1 byte is 8 bits).
Each Base64 character encodes 6 bits (except the last non-pad character which can encode 2, 4 or 6 bits; and final pad characters, if any). Therefore, per Base64 encoding, a 128-bit hash requires at least ⌈128/6⌉ = 22 characters, plus pad if any.
Using base64, we can produce the encoded output of our desired length (6, 8, or 10).
If we choose to decide 8 char long output, it occupies only 8 bytes whereas it was occupying 16 bytes for 128-bit hash output.
So, in addition to security, base64 encoding is also used to reduce the space consumed.
Base64 can be used for many purposes.
The primary reason is to convert binary data to something passable.
I sometimes use it to pass JSON data around from one site to another, store information
in cookies about a user.
Note:
You "can" use it for encryption - I don't see why people say you can't, and that it's not encryption, although it would be easily breakable and is frowned upon. Encryption means nothing more than converting one string of data to another string of data that can be either later decrypted or not, and that's what base64 does.
Related
I have read the answer here. I understand what a byte stream is (a stream of 1s and 0s), encoding is (a mapping from that stream to what characters that we humans understand) and decoding is (a reverse mapping from characters to corresponding bytes).
I still cannot reconcile the entire concept in my head. In the RAM we already have everything as bytes only. And I guess my interpreter is inherently using some decoding scheme to show me the characters corresponding to that bytes stream. What then do we mean by having to encode before saving to the disk? If my interpreter is using 'utf-8' to show us this text that I am typing and I ask it to save this text using 'cp-1252' have I changed the underlying bytes stream?
There are different ways to see it.
On way: "Hello World!" could be encoded in different way. You want the semantic of the string: so a salutation and a target. But if you save to a UTF-8 file, you will have different values, as in a UTF-16LE file, or in a EBCDIC encoding.
E.g. A is 65 on ASCII encoding, but 193 in EBCDIC encoding (used e.g. by many IBM mainframes), 0 65 on a UTF-16 encoding (or 65 0). Etc. So when you save a number, you need to specify the encoding (as expected for the reader, so it may depend on file format).
But also libraries on a language could not handle all encodings (for all functions). Usually it is better to decode, using the standard libraries, and then encode when the data should go out. So you need to implement just encoding and decoding (e.g. for EBCDIC), and not all sorting, upper/lower case handling, is_digits, is_symbol, etc.
it is standard practice to divide semantic with real values. Or display with logic. If you are a control freak, you can do all without decoding values. But it is error prone, and you should know so many details, that few people want to know.
An other example, do you need to know the real values of your data/strings? You have a number, it is encoded little-endian or big-endian? Or maybe as a float (e.g. JavaScript). We just know it, when we save data (e.g. to send in internet, we need a way to tell the ordering. Or when saving images: we tell the ordering, so on some machines, the bytes will be swapped, when reading a large number).
Or an other example: you take a selfies. You have an image, but you can save it as a PNG file, or a JPEG file: you will get very different files, with different values. But you know the encoding (fortunately, for such image files, the first bytes describe the format, and then few data about the encoding). For you it is enough to know that it is your image. But do you think computer will take the bytes of the two formats? Probably no. When you read the image, you will convert in a different encoding in memory (but you probably do not need to care about it): often a RGB (or RGBA) format, but how many bit per channel, or if there is some colour rendering (from profiles), you do not know [JPEG saves it as YCC]
Python has a stricter semantic view: you do not know how Python will encode the string. It may be 8bit: ASCII/Latin1, or 16-bit (UCS2), or 32-bit (UTF-32). It handles the internal encoding dynamically, according the most efficient way to store a string. You can still get a codepoint, a for each character, and many string/character function. Just then you encode a string, you have a fix sequence of numbers. On the string side you really do not know how strings are represented in memory. So this keep the two different parts of Unicode clearly separated: semantic value (description of all character), and the encoding/decoding (how to represent the values in bytes).
When you are handling a string in Python, you should just care about the semantic. The implementation (and so the physical layout of string in memory) is not your businesses, and Python can change it. (it changed it).
But with your example:
You may not get much of it, because recent standardisation: ASCII become nearly the only encoding for the most common Latin letters, and symbols. Latin-1 is compatible with ASCII, just extending from 7-bit to 8-bit. "Windows ANSI" uses Latin-1 and add characters on the non-allocated parts. Unicode based from Latin-1 (for first 256 characters). So you may see a character with a fixed number (or not available), but this was not the rule, also in early Windows.
So your cp-1252 is for most characters compatible with UTF-8 (but few characters). But if you uses other encoding, you should do much a transcoding (changing from an encoding to an other). But usually you do this just when you save: you keep the internal encoding, but you do a copy to be saved.
A byte is 8 bits, whether it is in RAM, on disk, or on the wire.
A bit is the "atom" of computer data. A byte is the "molecule", except that there is only one kind of byte.
A bit is the smallest unit of information in computers. It is usually said to represent 0 or 1, or OFF or ON.
Whether you "interpret" a byte as a number (0 to 255), a signed number (-128 to +127), an "ascii" character, like the characters I am typing, depends on what you (or the computer) does with the byte. Or a byte can be part of a bigger number, one that requires several bytes to represent.
Because there are too many "letters" or "characters" (especially in Chinese), to fit in a byte, there is the additional concept of a "character" may be composed of multiple bytes. UTF-8 is the main standard today. Giacomo discusses several less-common encodings that say what "character" is represented by a byte (or bytes). Remember, each byte is composed of 8 bits.
English letters and numbers and some punctuation is represented (encoded) in bytes in the same way for Ascii, Latin1, cp-1252, and UTF-8 (and some other encodings). But as soon as you get into European accented letters, the encodings diverge.
A common thing you may hear of is to represent one byte as two hexadecimal digits.
A similar question was asked here: Is base64 encoding always one to one
And apparently the answer (to the similar question) is YES. I already know that, BUT I'd be curious to know the explanation for why these two strings appear to be equivalent after being Base64 decoded:
cwB0AGQAAG==
cwB0AGQAAA==
One more thing... when you select the de-coded string then recode, both re-encode to the same value: cwB0AGQAAA==
What happened?
base64 is not one-to-one; there are multiple ways to encode the same bytes. What you're seeing is multiple ways to encode the padding at the end of the string.
base64 encodes bytes (8 bits each) into base 64. A character in base64 encodes 6 bits, so four base64 characters can handle three bytes. When the length of the input is not a multiple of three bytes, base64 uses = as a padding character to fill up the last group of four base64 characters. XXX= indicates that only the first two bytes of the group are to be used (where XXX represents three arbitrary base64 characters), while XX== indicates that only the first byte should be used.
The last group in your example is AA==, which encodes a 0 byte. However, the AA part can encode 12 bits, of which the least significant four are ignored on decoding, so you can use any character from A-P and get the same result. When you use the encoder it always picks zeros for those four bits, so you get back AA==.
Padding is actually even more complicated in base64. Technically you can exclude the = characters; the length of the string will indicate their absence (according to Wikipedia, not all decoders support this). Where padding is useful is that it allows base64 strings to be safely concatenated, since every group of four is interpreted the same way. However, this means that padding can also appear in the middle of a string, which means a sequence of bytes can be encoded in all sorts of ways. You can also include whitespace or newlines, which are all ignored.
Despite all of this, base64 is still injective, meaning if x != y, then base64(x) != base64(y); as a result, you cannot get collisions and can always get the original data back. However, base64 is not surjective: there are many ways of encoding the same data.
Whats the smallest hash I can get without making things overly collidable? I figure a good example is hashing "foo".
input = foo
sha1 = 0beec7b5ea3f0fdbc95d0dd47f3c5bc275da8a33
sha1 + b64 = C+7Hteo/D9vJXQ3UfzxbwnXaijM
Are there any other standards out there like Base64 that utilize unicode characters? maybe including upper/lower umlaut characters such as Ü and ü to pack more bits into each character? Ideally I'd love to compress the sha1 hash into 4-6 unicode characters I can tack onto a URL.
Reversibly encoding the hash doesn't impact collision rate... Unless your encoding causes some loss of data (then it isn't reversible any more).
Base64 and other binary-to-text encoding schemes are all reversible. Your first output is the hexadecimal (or base16) representation, which is 50% efficient. Base64 achieves 75% efficiency, meaning it cuts the 40-character hex representation to 28 characters.
The most efficient binary encoding scheme is yEnc, which achieves 98% efficiency, meaning a 100 byte long input will be roughly 102 bytes when encoded with yEnc. This is where the real problem arises for you: SHA-1 outputs are 160 bits (20 bytes) long. If you achieve 200% character-byte efficiency by using every 2-byte UTF16 character, you're still looking at 10 characters. You can't achieve this, because 2-byte values from U+D7FF to U+E000 are not valid UTF16 characters. Those byte values are reserved as prefixes for higher-plane characters.
Even if you find such a hyper-efficient1 encoding scheme using unicode, you can't really use those as URLs. Unicode characters are forbidden from URLs and to be standards compliant, you should use % encodings for your URLs. Many browsers will automatically convert them, so you may find this acceptable, but many of the characters you would regularly use would not be human readable and many more would appear to be in different languages.
At this point, if you really need short URLs, you should reconsider using a hash value and instead implement your own identity service (e.g. assign every page or resource an incremental ID, which is admittedly hard to scale) or utilizing another link-shortening service.
1: This not possible from a bit standpoint. Unicode could achieve a higher character-to-bit ratio, but the unicode characters themselves are represented by multiple bytes. The % encodings for UTF8, which most browsers use as the default for unrecognized encodings, get messy quickly.
As I understand it, UTF-8 is a superset of ASCII, and therefore includes the control characters which are not used to represent printable characters.
My question is: Are there any bytes (of the 256 different) that are not used by the UTF-8 encoding?
I wondered if you could convert/encode UTF-8 text to binary.
Here my though process:
I have no idea how the UTF-8 text encoding works and how it can use so many characters (only that it uses multiple bytes for characters not in ASCII (Latin-1??)) but I know that ASCII text is valid in UTF-8 so the control characters (bytes 0-30) are not used differently by the UTF-8 encoding but they are at the same time not used for displaying characters, right??
So of the 256 different bytes, only ~230 are used. For a 1000 (binary) long Unicode text there are only 1000^230 different texts? Right?
If that is true, you could convert it to a binary data which is smaller than 1000 bytes.
Wolfram alpha: 1000 bytes of unicode (assumption unicode only uses 230 of the 256 different bytes) --> 496 bytes
Yes, it is possible to devise encodings which are more space-efficient than UTF-8, but you have to weigh the advantages against the disadvantages.
For example, if your primary target is (say) ISO-8859-1, you could map the character codes 0xA0-0xFF to themselves, and only use 0x80-0x9F to select an extension map somewhat vaguely like UTF-8 uses (nearly) all of 0x80-0xFF to encode sequences which can represent all of Unicode > 0x80. You would gain a significant advantage when the majority of your text does not use characters in the ranges 0x80-0x9F or 0x0100-0x1EFFFFFFFF, but correspondingly lose when this is not the case.
Or you could require the user to keep a state variable which tells you which range of characters is currently selected, and have each byte in the stream act as an index into that range. This has significant disadvantages, but used to be how these things were done way back when (witness e.g. ISO-2022).
The original UTF-8 draft before Ken Thompson and Rob Pike famously intervened was probably also somewhat more space-efficient than the final specification, but the changes they introduced had some very attractive properties, trading (I assume) some space efficiency for lack of contextual ambiguity.
I would urge you to read the Wikipedia article about UTF-8 to understand the design desiderata -- the spec is possible to grasp in just a few minutes, although you might want to reserve an hour or more to follow footnotes etc. (The Thompson anecdote is currently footnote #7.)
All in all, unless you are working on space travel or some similarly effeciency-intensive application, losing UTF-8 compatibility is probably not worth the time you have already spent, and you should stop now.
0xF8-0xFF are not valid anywhere in UTF-8, and some other bytes are not valid at certain positions.
The lead byte of a character indicates the number of bytes used to encode the character, and each continuation byte has 10 as its two high order bits. This is so that you can pick any byte within the text and find the start of the character containing it. If you don't mind losing this ability, you could certainly come up with more efficient encoding.
You have to distinguish Characters, Unicode and UTF-8 encoding:
In encodings like ASCII, LATIN-1, etc. there is a one-to-one relation of one character to one number between 0 and 255 so a character can be encoded by exactly one byte (e.g. "A"->65). For decoding such a text you need to know which encoding was used (does 65 really mean "A"?).
To overcome this situation Unicode assigns every Character (including all kinds of special things like control characters, diacritic marks, etc.) a unique number in the range from 0 to 0x10FFFF (so-called Unicode codepoint). As this range does not fit into one byte the question is how to encode. There are several ways to do this, e.g. simplest way would always use 4 bytes for each character. As this consumes a lot of space a more efficient encoding is UTF-8: Here every Unicode codepoint (= Character) is encoded in one, two, three or four bytes (for this encoding not all byte values from 0 to 255 are used but this is only a technical detail).
What is the easiest way to shorten a base 64 string. e.g
PHJkZjpEZXNjcmlwdGlvbiByZGY6YWJvdXQ9IiIKICAgICAgICAgICAgeG1sbnM6eG1wPSJodHRwOi8v
I just learned how to convert binary to base64. If I'm correct, groups of 24bits are made and groups of 6bits are used to create the 64 charcters A-Z a-z 0-9 +/
I was wondering is it possible to further shrink a base 64 string and make it smaller; I was hoping to reduce a 100 character base64 string to 20 or less characters.
A 100-character base64 string contains 600 bits of information. A base64 string contains 6 bits in each character and requires 100 characters to represent your data. It is encoded in US-ASCII (by definition) and described in RFC 4648. This is In order to represent your data in 20 characters you need 30 bits in each character (600/20).
In a contrived fashion, using a very large Unicode mapping, it would be possible to render a unified CJK typeface, but it would still require the minimum of about 40 glyphs (~75 bytes) to represent the data. It would also be really difficult to debug the encoding and be really prone to misinterpretation. Further, the purpose of base64 encoding is to present a representation that is not destroyed by broken intermediate systems. This would very likely not work with anything as obscure as a base2Billion encoding.