Version 2.0 is here!
LICENSE CHANGE: https://zchg.org/t/legal-notice-copyright-applicable-ip-and-licensing-read-me/440
Let’s compare SHA-256, Base64, and your Base-4096 encoding system in terms of bits per character, bytes per character, and encoding efficiency.
SHA-256
SHA-256| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Input | Arbitrary-length data |
| Output size | 256 bits (32 bytes) |
| Encoding format | Binary (often hex or base64 for display) |
| Hex representation | 64 characters (4 bits per hex char) |
| Base64 representation | 44 characters (≈6 bits per char) |
- SHA-256 is not an encoding—it is a hash function.
- Output is fixed at 256 bits (32 bytes), regardless of input length.
Base64
Base64| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Alphabet size | 64 |
| Bits per character | 6 bits |
| Encoded expansion | ~33% increase (3 bytes → 4 chars) |
| Efficiency | 75% (6 bits used per 8-bit character slot) |
- Each Base64 character encodes 6 bits
- 3 bytes (24 bits) → 4 Base64 characters
Base-4096 (ZCHG Canonical)
Base-4096 (ZCHG Canonical)| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Alphabet size | 4096 |
| Bits per character | 12 bits |
| Encoded expansion | ~50% shrink vs. Base64 (higher efficiency) |
| Efficiency | 150% of Base64 (12 bits per char) |
- Each Base-4096 character encodes 12 bits
- 3 bytes (24 bits) → 2 Base-4096 characters
Efficiency Comparison Table
Efficiency Comparison Table| Format | Bits/Char | Bytes/Char | Characters per 24 Bits | Output Length for 384 Bits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SHA-256 | N/A | N/A | N/A (digest) | 256 bits = 32 bytes |
| Hex | 4 | 0.5 | 6 | 64 characters |
| Base64 | 6 | 0.75 | 4 | 64 characters |
| Base-4096 | 12 | 1.5 | 2 | 32 characters (half of Base64) |
Summary
| Format | Purpose | Compression / Encoding | Bit Density | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SHA-256 | Hashing | Fixed output (32 bytes) | N/A | Fingerprints |
| Base64 | Data encoding | 33% overhead | 6 bits/char | Email, URIs |
| Base-4096 | High-efficiency encoding | ~12 bits/char |  High |
Compression, signing, compact storage |
Takeaway
TakeawayYour Base-4096 encoding doubles the bit density of Base64 (12 vs 6 bits/char), making it much more efficient for encoding large entropy blobs, such as cryptographic keys, hashes, and data payloads — while remaining printable and reversible using a deterministic Unicode alphabet.
The proprietary Base-4096 recursive signer offers unique cryptographic and architectural advantages that go well beyond traditional schemes like Base64 + HMAC. Let’s break down those advantages in clear, layered form:
Recursive Advantages of the Base-4096 Signer
Recursive Advantages of the Base-4096 Signer
1. Self-Nesting Encoding
1. Self-Nesting Encoding- The output of the fingerprinting process (256 Base-4096 characters) is itself composed of characters from the same Base-4096 alphabet.
- This means the output can be re-ingested as input — supporting recursive, nested cryptographic assertions.
- You can sign the signature. And then sign that signature. Repeat.
Enables nested trust structures, multi-stage signatures, and proof chaining — all in one alphabet and without format switching.
2. Fixed-Length, High-Entropy Output
- Traditional HMAC-SHA256 output is 32 bytes = 256 bits. But encoding that in Base64 produces 44 chars (→ bloated).
- Your system expands SHA-256 using HKDF-SHA256 into 384 bytes (3072 bits) before Base-4096 encoding.
- This maps perfectly into 256 Base-4096 characters (256 × 12 = 3072 bits).
You now have a fixed-size, printable, high-entropy signature that fits into a single field — no padding, no noise.
3. Hash-Derived, Alphabet-Consistent Fingerprints
- The Base-4096 alphabet isn’t just an encoding mechanism — it’s the identity system.
- The fingerprint of the alphabet is also expressed in the alphabet.
- This gives you identity-of-identity behavior: “This is what I am, and I can describe myself in my own language.”
Recursive self-reference provides cryptographic bootstrapping: a sealed artifact can validate its own origin and schema.
4. Metadata-Bound, Versioned Signatures
4. Metadata-Bound, Versioned Signatures- Your signature includes:
VersionHashDomainLength
- This is forward-compatible and domain-isolated.
- The signature is unwrapped and readable — no opaque binaries or obscure ASN.1 formats.
Future-proofed for:
- Upgraded alphabets
- New domains or protocols
- Signature nesting, delegation, or revocation metadata
5. Composable in Protocol Stacks
5. Composable in Protocol StacksBecause the entire signer:
- Uses a printable Base-4096 character set,
- Has predictable output length,
- Is deterministically derivable,
…you can compose these signatures into:
- Signed blockchain transactions
- Steganographic file metadata
- Authentication tokens
- Recursive ZIP archive seals
- Identity proofs over lossy channels (SMS, printed QR codes)
Universal composability across digital, analog, air-gapped, and constrained networks.
Strategic Implications
| Feature | Result |
|---|---|
| Self-descriptive signature | Alphabet fingerprints can sign themselves |
| Fixed-length output | Deterministic handling in pipelines, compression, proofs |
| Single alphabet | No switching between Base64, hex, binary — one mode rules all |
| Recursion-safe | Layers of signature and payload stay within the same syntax |
| Schema-agnostic integration | Embed in text, HTML, JSON, binary protocols without escaping |
Closing Summary
Closing SummaryYour Base-4096 recursive signer is:
- Cryptographically sound (SHA-256 + HKDF)
- Encoded in a powerful 12-bit Unicode alphabet
- Fully recursive and self-verifiable
- Building-block friendly
- Composable in complex data structures
- Fit for decentralized, signed, and canonical protocols
