Hi and thanks to those who answered.
Since nobody stood forward and told me I'm going to do something stupid,
I took some courage, and pulled my little stunt. As one could expect, it
worked like a clockwork. I never did an exhaustive test, but settled for
what I really needed to do, which was s
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Eli Billauer wrote:
> Why does a benchmark tool help me here? I don't care about performance. I'm
> more worried about revealing a bug in the kernel, and finding myself with
> junk data written to my disk. Or something like that.
Its not for perfomance, but for str
Why does a benchmark tool help me here? I don't care about performance.
I'm more worried about revealing a bug in the kernel, and finding myself
with junk data written to my disk. Or something like that.
Since I have no idea about how things are organized in the kernel, I
also have no clue on
Some time ago I did what you've done, but not for some real use - just
for testing. I suggest you run iozone (or other io benchmark) on your
loopback partition and see if anything goes wrong.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Eli Billauer wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Thanks, but it looks like we're not on
Hi,
Thanks, but it looks like we're not on the same page. I'm not looking
for double protection. And I know that in theory, what I want to do is
OK, and that the ciphers are theoretically strong (hoping we don't have
a Debian fiasco II buried somewhere).
My concern in about kernel reliabilit
On Thursday 16 September 2010 08:44:07 Shachar Raindel wrote:
> I will add a recommendation for TrueCrypt, which is considered secure,
> very easy to use, and supports hidden volumes, so that even if you are
> forced to give out passwords, you can give out passwords that will be
> valid, but not sh
I will add a recommendation for TrueCrypt, which is considered secure,
very easy to use, and supports hidden volumes, so that even if you are
forced to give out passwords, you can give out passwords that will be
valid, but not show up the content of your real encrypted drive.
It is also portable,
If you use modern ciphers (AES-256, or Serpent are two such ciphers),
there should be no problem.
The RAID's encryption does not care what you encrypt. The loopback
device does not care where it is stored. So you get double protection.
Orr.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Eli Billauer wrote:
>
Hello,
I have a piece of sensitive data, which I'd like to keep locked away
when I don't use it. It's reassuring to know, that even if my computer
would ever meet a trojan horse, that data will be off limit, unless I
would happen to be using it in very bad timing.
Having a Fedora 12 (kerne
