promike1987 at gmail.com
Sun Sep 27 23:50:10 CEST 2015
There is really no threat or adversary. I really hope the threat is much
lower than 1%.
I had never dealt with encryption before, and I find it very
I'd like to defend my data in case it's lost or stolen.
(In this (windows) world I think an unencrypted reiserfs could be
So my plan is to establish an indiscernible encrypted home partition.
I wouldn't like to feel any side effects, like more passwords, bigger
disk usage or slower I/O throughput.
I already use EncFS which is rather slow. I made some 1080i videos with
my camcorder, and vlc struggles with it.
On 15-09-27 20:55:54, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 27.09.2015, Mike Nagie wrote:
> > As we just have concluded that a Diceware passphrase is much more
> > secure, then I'd like to ask you: should I need more than one LUKS key?
> What's your thread model, actually? Whom do you want to protect your
> data from?
> > The original idea was, creating an encrypted partition for the /home
> > then I'm going to set a very strong master passphrase (I assume that
> > slot 0 is the master) after that I add another LUKS key which is the
> > same password as my account's.
> That would reduce your password strength to the strength of the
> weakest of these two.
> > Does more than one LUKS key reduce the security?
> A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This law applies
> perfectly also to this particular scenario.
> > Does it matter if I have a really strong passphrase and a not that strong second phrase?
> Think about it. It's quite obvious.
> dm-crypt mailing list
> dm-crypt at saout.de
You are so lucky!
More information about the dm-crypt