[60426] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Can you keep a secret? This encrypted drive can...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Gutmann)
Tue Nov 7 11:03:36 2006
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann)
To: alserkli@inbox.ru, docbook.xml@gmail.com
Cc: adam@homeport.org, cryptography@metzdowd.com, djm@mindrot.org,
FDE@www.xml-dev.com, krstic@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu,
smb@cs.columbia.edu
In-Reply-To: <addede3b0611031501r1b2e0249tee1f16f9799535ba@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:22:08 +1300
"Saqib Ali" <docbook.xml@gmail.com> writes:
>I compile a lot of software on my laptop, and I *certainly notice* the
>difference between my office laptop (no encryption) and my travel laptop
>(with FDE). The laptops are exactly the same, with the same image loaded. The
>only difference is the FDE software that is installed on the travel laptop.
That's because you're doing something that produces worst-case behaviour. The
(obvious) solution is the standard "don't do that, then". My main development
machine builds to a RAM drive, and for some odd reason I don't notice any disk
access latency at all.
>But that is because it only support 128 bit AES, which is a major drawback as
>most enterprise settings require at least 256 bit AES.
"Realising the importance of the case, my men are applying twice the usual
amount of tinfoil".
Peter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
