On 15/07/13 05:22, Bill Oliver wrote:
I have read, but do not perceive personally, that encrypted disks are a
bit slower. But really, the reason that I don't encrypt entire disks is
a fear of what happens if either I forget my password or there's a
corruption issue. With an encrypted folder, then I lose that particular
data. If I encrypt the entire disk, then either my entire home
directory or my entire system is hosed -- depending on the partitioning.
99% of what I have on my computer I don't give a rat's ass about someone
else seeing if I misplace my laptop. The few things that I do want
protected by encryption -- work files, case data, etc. I can put in a
folder and encrypt with cryptkeeper. If that gets fouled up, I still
have my box...
I can vouch that an encrypted disk is slower - certainly it uses more
CPU which adds some latency but on a reasonable processor it's still
very usable. I think if you have a processor with AES (or AMD/VIA)
equivalent, LUKS will use that too which significantly increase performance.
--
Ian Chapman.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
