arno at wagner.name
Tue Dec 2 04:31:31 CET 2014
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 03:43:53 CET, 0x14 at unseen.is wrote:
> >No bad logic so far, I overlooked that you use plain devices
> >and that you seem to be after some form of plausible deniablility,
> >not after increased security. Sorry.
> Some form of increased security with help of plausible deniability :-p
> I assumed it sounds and looks like another snake oil, so I came here
> for professional opinion :)
> >So if that is your goal, that would work. But be aware that
> >you always have to type the full (long) command in and that
> >you must make sure it does not end up on disk (shell history),
> >otherwise it becomes obvious the two things are not random.
> Actually, I was writing a bash script to simplify things a bit
> before I realize I need to clarify things here :) And I know about
> HISTIGNORE and stuff.
> What`s your opinion anyways? You do support some "plausible
> deniability" efforts with reservations, as I understood.
Actually the other way round. I think plausible deniability is
dangerous to the people using it in most situations. I am not
going to help with it.
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: arno at wagner.name
GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718
A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -- Plato
If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of
"news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier
More information about the dm-crypt