On Sunday 20 December 2015 09:51:04 to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 04:08:30PM +0100, Anders Andersson wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 5:00 AM, David Christensen > > > > <dpchr...@holgerdanske.com> wrote: > > > Another, additional, option is self-encrypting drives (SED), which > > > are operating system agnostic and protect the entire contents of > > > drive with zero CPU overhead. > > > > Emphasis on the word "additional" here. Unless you have access to > > the source code and hardware that actually implements the drive > > encryption, I would trust it about as far as I can throw the drive, > > I'd like to see that ;-) > > But seriously: given the history of firmware botches around (yes, > including encrypted harddisks), and given the keen interest of shady > state agencies [1] [2] (and that they prefer to work in the dark, > like vampires and cockroaches), I strongly agree with your throwing > sentiment. > > [1] http://www.wired.com/2015/02/nsa-firmware-hacking/ > [2] > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/17/kaspersky_labs_equation_group/ > > -- t Better yet, feed it to your wood chipper. That should result in unreadable, unrecoverable encryption. Highly recommended by Grandpa Gene. ;-)
Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Some mill pix are at: Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene/GO704-pix>
