Skip to main content
Information Security

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

12
  • 1
    I'm not sure if I understand the concept: either one has to continuiously re-encrypt the fragments with new keys (which requires decryption with the old key first) or the encryption keys for each fragment needs to be static - in which case I don't see any "dynamic mapping". Still, the question stands what problem you are trying to solve which is not solved already by simpler methods (like simple TPM/HSM backed encryption). Commented Jul 23, 2025 at 18:24
  • @Steffen Ullrich Thanks for clarifying. I agree—re-encrypting fragments repeatedly would essentially act like static keys or periodic re-encryption. My “dynamic mapping” idea doesn’t rotate encryption keys but adds a separate mapping layer that shifts over time or per access session. The key stays stable, but fragment references change, so a stolen snapshot can’t easily reconstruct the file. I know TPM/HSM is the standard—I’m just exploring whether this extra “floating mapping layer” adds value against attackers with only periodic snapshot access. Commented Jul 23, 2025 at 18:29
  • What problem are you trying to solve? Commented Jul 23, 2025 at 18:32
  • @ vidarlo The goal is to make stolen or leaked snapshots harder to reconstruct into a full usable file. Even if fragments are copied, shifting mapping/references aim to add an extra layer of complexity, making partial periodic snapshots less valuable to attackers. Commented Jul 23, 2025 at 18:34
  • 1
    While you have a lot of ideas, this is too vague and metaphorical for a concrete answer. I'm also not sure how throwing in “AI” is supposed to help. You should write down specific security goals (what needs to be protected from whom) and learn about standard solutions like full-disk encryption and encrypted file containers. It's quite possible that if you remove all the fancy metaphors, you end up with a relatively simple problem that has a known solution. Commented Jul 24, 2025 at 3:14