> Performance is great, nearly "metal" SSD speeds.
But how does that compare exactly, performance wise, against Bitlocker and LUKS? (assuming similar strength encryption algorithms are selected)
But how does that compare exactly, performance wise, against Bitlocker and LUKS? (assuming similar strength encryption algorithms are selected)
The principal difference is the native speed of raw IO - NVmEs are an order of magnitude faster than SSDs. TC/VC don't use hardware acceleration, so all the encryption work falls on the CPU. On a machine with a reasonably modern CPU, TC/VC run nearly at drive's native speed.
I assume by that you mean it doesn't use the AES instructions? That's odd to me.
On the other hand, trying to backdoor XOR would give you an astronomically higher amount of white noise. Finding important data mixed in with all the other things a computer XORs would be much harder.
If the attacker has access to your computer, you've already lost. If the attacker built your computer, it was never even a fight.
Given two USB drives, one encrypted with BitLocker and another with TC or VC, chances of master key recovery by Microsoft are definitely not the same.
I don't think those two sentences hold water when put together. In practice, if your risk is master key leakage and theft of the encrypted data by microsoft, you shouldn't be using windows. If you suspect that, MS can have a kernel mode driver masquerading as anything else, and it can just siphon your master key whenever you enter it.
I like VC for the portability of the encrypted .tc files. Keep all my backups as tc files, and recovered from more than one failure using them.
Once had an issue where dropbox corrupted the duplicates, so dont use dropbox anymore.
just gonna drop that like that aint a $10k+ implication, gonna need a src or ref thanks
unless you mean by 3letters, which dont exactly give their backdoors to randoms.
randoms aint coming across 3letter's backdoors, not active/modern ones anyway
it's probably more than a $10k implication..
Veracrypt has a neat benchmark tool so you know the speed beforehand. I suppose most CPUs have native support for the popular algorithms, so the bottleneck really is the disk, not CPU itself or the software.