Hi!
Am Freitag, den 09.05.2008, 12:56 -0500 schrieb Robert J. Hansen:
> I am not a fan of TrueCrypt's hidden volume feature, and I think most
> people who are fans haven't thought things through.
I agree. All the "plausible deniability" stuff (Truecrypt or whatever
else) is only good if 'they'
On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 04:52:31AM -0400, Faramir wrote:
[snip Sven Radde's explanations about the salt]
>Excellent explanation, thanks. But I still miss the point about the
> salt number doesn't need to be kept secret... I mean: if the salt value
> is not known to the program that must validat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Florian Philipp escribió:
> On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 08:21 -0400, Faramir wrote:
>
>> Well, I am going to carry gpg in my USB flash drive, either using
>> portable firefox+FireGPG+some way to put gpg on the drive, or portable
>> thunderbird+gpg for porta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Pentchev escribió:
> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 04:52:31AM -0400, Faramir wrote:
> [snip Sven Radde's explanations about the salt]
(removed the part where I say what I understood about salt)
> It seems that you are missing another important point
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10-May-08, at 04:37 , Peter Pentchev wrote:
It seems that you are missing another important point about the salt -
it is generated randomly each and every time something needs to be
encrypted :) There is no such thing as "the salt value for thi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thanks, Sven Radde, I figure Truecrypt will be a good option when I
have enough privileges in the other computer too, and I am a bit
unwilling to use an outdated version to work around that limitation...
For now, I think the best option would be a
