|
Sorry for some reason I that as Amazon's and we'll Gal Godot...
|
|
|
|
|
Are you in the pub again?
|
|
|
|
|
Not yet posting from my phone, so to all please forgive fat fingering
|
|
|
|
|
What are people using these days for folder/file encryption?
After a few collisions with MS stupidity, enabling bit-locker is anathema to me, besides, I'm not interested in encrypting entire hard drives. If I have a hard drive fail, I just replace them and sledgehammer the old drive (see caution below about this technique).
I'm playing around with VeraCrypt which shows promise. Looking to stay with something public domain rather than commercial "I left a backdoor open for the <insert govt="" here="">" product. I know, I'm being paranoid.
cg
Downfalls of the sledgehammer approach: a cautionary tail
So, years ago, long before SSDs hit the market, I had 3 or 4 drives that that reached the ripe old age of 5. Replacing them with new 7200 rpm units, I thought I would teach some of my children about data safety and let them earn a few bucks. Hiring them, I encouraged them to smash away, and get back to me when they thought they were done. Destructive little buggers, they could work for Hillary.  I had no idea what I started.
A few years ago, I went looking for a stack of old laptops. I knew I could put them up for sale on Ebay, easily pick up a few bucks for Christmas. Can't find them anywhere. Come to find out that some of the kids had been listening/watching the drive destruction process. Figuring *all* old computer equipment fell into the same category, they decided they wanted to see what was in a laptop, employing a hammer to open them. I wasn't told until many months had passed. Took me a while to calm down (one was an old development laptop that I had planned on installing Linux).
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
modified 4-Sep-17 11:33am.
|
|
|
|
|
If any government organisation has so little to do that they need to read my data - let them go ahead. I'm more concerned about losing my laptop/phone; your average criminal won't be able to break any decent encryption on the market.
Lovely (horror) story about your kids. 
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is why I have stopped travelling to the US. Americans as people are welcoming, but their government is bipolar - they either let anyone in, or they go full paranoia mode.
I suspect that this is due to their religion - non-profiling is considered so important that they would rather inconvenience everyone than the very small minority who might be dangerous 
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: non-profiling is considered so important that they would rather inconvenience everyone than the very small minority who might be dangerous
I've had this exact discussion a number of times. Profiling is not a bad thing so long as it is done correctly and fairly. As I'm sure you're personally aware, Israel does it very well.
Based on best current information, look for people who fit that changing pattern. One day it might be single men between 20-35 flying on a one way ticket and on another it might be grandmothers driving minivans across the border.
It is easy for me to say that, as I'm a professional white male in his mid 30s but I must fit some profile because I get stopped for additional screening every time I fly.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're paranoid enough, you write your own.
One-time pad - Wikipedia[^]
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
7zips got encryption. don't bother crypting much (one file with my old less often used passwords, and some client proprietary info - the latter I delete as soon as no longer needed.)
I think 7-zip uses AES; and the one rule for that: the longer the password the harder (longer) to crack. Anything non real word with length > 10 pretty much uncrackable without a real super computer.
My own stuff, source codes included, really only valuable to me - I mean anybody can write an accounting apps or sales entry/reporting systems, why would they want mine which are nearly always customised to a speicfic single client anyway?
signature upgrading ... please wait.
|
|
|
|
|
PowerArchiver has PK AES 256 Bit
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll look into that. It's been a long time since I've looked at what is available. Like I said, Bitlocker just gives me shudders. One customer is a full "no one ever got fired for using Microsoft" shop. Looking at the things they deal with as well as the nonsense with Office 365, no way.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
7Zip uses AES256 for native (7Z) files.
For ZIP files, it allows the usage of AES256 or ZipCrypto algorithms. As the ZIP file format only specifies ZipCrypto, using AES will require something more than Windows "Compressed Folders" to access the files.
Generally the only time I use these features is when I need to send personal info (eg direct deposit form) to my employer over gmail.
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
I have an old Batman decoder ring that is handy. I think it was:
A=1
B=2
C=3
etc.
Arguing with a woman is like reading the Software License Agreement. In the end, you ignore everything and click "I agree".
Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
That's nothing, to really throw people off, I had one set with:
A=65
B=66
C=67
...etc
|
|
|
|
|
I went for the High Security model:
A = 41
B = 42
C = 43
... That'll fox 'em!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
That should perform better too. 
|
|
|
|
|
Now you've done it, I laughed and lost my key. 
Arguing with a woman is like reading the Software License Agreement. In the end, you ignore everything and click "I agree".
Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
I may be able to help you there. I've got these X-Ray Specs I bought from a comic ad, and for a suitable fee ...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: Looking to stay with something public domain rather than commercial "I left a backdoor open for the <insert govt here>" product. I know, I'm being paranoid.
If I recall correctly... Truecrypt was open source too 
Anyways a couple of people I know recommend veracrypt too.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and...?
Are you suggesting it had a backdoor?
TrueCrypt went through an independent audit, and its results were widely reported. While a few fairly minor bugs were found, nobody's made a claim it had any sort of backdoor.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: Are you suggesting it had a backdoor?
Not, but after knowing that one of the main developers went to work for the government and the message on the official website when all happened ("WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure as it may contain unfixed security issues")
Let me say like that, with enough information and enough power computing... you don't really need a backdoor. You can crack it directly.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
It's no secret that researchers working on encryption regularly get spooked by, well, the spooks when they're doing a little too well. There was a well-documented case a few years ago about the FBI getting frustrated by their failure to access some TrueCrypt-encrypted documents. Of course, that could very well be "what they want you to believe".
Nelek wrote: with enough information and enough power computing... you don't really need a backdoor. You can crack it directly
And enough time, like until the Sun goes supernova. But that's true of any encryption software, not just TrueCrypt.
|
|
|
|
|
The emphasis was in "enough information". Some insider knowledge, a not so good random generation and the time can reduce drastically.
But yes... if everything about the quantum computers is true... it doesn't matter anymore. In the moment the first one is operative, all current security will be obsolete.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I like your kids.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend; inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
