sorry, intented to drop in on irc for a while, but being a bit busy atm. spot on with the clarification between the TrueCrypt application and the encryption format, let me in turn clarify the difference between encrypted partitions and encrypted containers
tltr: partions put another level of abstraction between user and use case - a difficulty that a vast majority of the users wont be able to handle unless you provide first class (graphical) support .. see the evolution of installers for linux distros as an example: partitioning is so much easier nowadays but it is still the main hurdle for people to give linux a try. most users dont fully understand partitions and are afraid to break things from the users perspective, the TrueCrypt format is similar to FAT32 - probably the worst of all widespread disk encryption formats (especially if you dont use keyslots) but also the only one thats accessible from windows, osx and linux alike. odds are this wont change anytime soon. regular users wont be able to use TrueCrypt containers/partitions without a GUI - your documentation on how to use containers on the command line is fine, but only for the ~5% of users that have to confidence to actually use the command line while I share your concerns about alienating users with too many different GUIs, right now you only (graphically) support luks partitions, not luks containers. what probably adds to the confusion is that the TrueCrypt format is rarely used with partitions (although you can do that as well) but mostly with containers. the name might sound a bit more general but luckyluks is only about luks containers - since luks partitions are already covered eg by udisks2/gnome disks advantages of encrypted containers: -> No need to deal with partition table wizardry when creating an encrypted container, you basically create a file on a harddrive, it doesn't matter if its an internal one or an external usbstick etc.. -> Backup is straightforward as well, just copy the file somewhere else -> sharing confidential information: again, copy the container file. similar to gpg encrypted archives but easier to handle: unlock/view or modify data/lock again -> You can easily add some encrypted private data to an unencrypted external harddrive without repartitioning -> Lots of users are already quite familiar with all this, because their first touch with data encryption has been TrueCrypt which uses the encrypted container approach advantages of encrypted partitions: -> partition tables can be scanned automatically, so integration into automounting tools can be possible there is support for encrypted (luks, encfs) partitions in automounting tools because it is straightforward to implement. unfortunately with encrypted containers/partitons using the TrueCrypt format this is not possible. they can only be verified as such if you successfully open them with your password. btw, that would probably be the answer if somebody from the udisks team finally finds some time to respond to the bugreport from 2013 you've been referring to hope you dont feel like I want to sell you a tool just because I put a bit of effort into writing it ;) if I'd like to promote anything it is the reduced complexity that encrypted containers offer for casual users. maybe give it a thought - happy to discuss things cheers, jasper On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 19:48:15 +0100 intrigeri <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > sajolida wrote (10 Mar 2015 16:08:41 GMT) : > > We had been trying to get rid of TrueCrypt for many reasons and for > > years before we actually managed to do so in Tails 1.2.1. So I'm > > pretty sure that we don't want to make it easier for people to go on > > using it. > > I think you're mixing up "using the TrueCrypt software" and "using > TrueCrypt volumes". Let's clarify. > > We stopped shipping the TrueCrypt software for good reasons, but we > still support TrueCrypt volumes (as you know, since you wrote part of > the documentation). For interoperability purposes (not mentioning the > "hidden volume" feature, which I'm less sure about), IMO it would be > good to support such volumes graphically. > > Now, introducing yet another frontend would feel inconsistent IMO > (especially one that also supports LUKS, that we already have good > support for) => I believe the needed support should be added to > udisks first (that's #6337), so that GNOME Disks can support it as > well some day, in the very same interface as LUKS :) > > Cheers,
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to [email protected].
