<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: #!*A5%amp;j9 &#8211; How to Encrypt Your File System</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/</link>
	<description>Open Source, Open Standards</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rkjnsn</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6781</link>
		<dc:creator>rkjnsn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6781</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, currently, it can only encrypt Windows operating systems and not Linux.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not entirely accurate.  It is possible to have a truecrypt encrypted system partition by building an initramfs image that prompts for the password and unlocks the truecrypt partition.  In fact, this is how I currently have my laptop setup, and have experienced no issues whatsoever.  The one caveat is that you need to mount --move the truecrypt control filesystem under the root filesystem after you mount.  Otherwise, the system gets confused because there is a mounted filesystem that it can\&#039;t see.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>However, currently, it can only encrypt Windows operating systems and not Linux.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is not entirely accurate.  It is possible to have a truecrypt encrypted system partition by building an initramfs image that prompts for the password and unlocks the truecrypt partition.  In fact, this is how I currently have my laptop setup, and have experienced no issues whatsoever.  The one caveat is that you need to mount &#8211;move the truecrypt control filesystem under the root filesystem after you mount.  Otherwise, the system gets confused because there is a mounted filesystem that it can\&#8217;t see.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: laytonjb</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6782</link>
		<dc:creator>laytonjb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6782</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hmm... my bad - I got the information from wikipedia (not the best source). Here is the link:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It says that the Windows version (XP or Vista) can encrypt the boot partition or the entire boot drive. I took that to mean it only worked on Windows (evidently not a good assumption).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your corrected information. It sounds like a pretty good configuration to me.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thanks!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jeff
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm&#8230; my bad &#8211; I got the information from wikipedia (not the best source). Here is the link:</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueCrypt</a></p>
<p>It says that the Windows version (XP or Vista) can encrypt the boot partition or the entire boot drive. I took that to mean it only worked on Windows (evidently not a good assumption).</p>
<p>Thanks for your corrected information. It sounds like a pretty good configuration to me.</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leemon</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6783</link>
		<dc:creator>leemon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6783</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;For a very limited encryption solution, consider vim:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The vim editor provides a file encryption service. It is moderately secure encryption that is well described when one enters :help encrypt in the vim editor.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I use a single vim encrypted file for all my passworded logins. The one file has the url, userid and password for each site I access. I make it easy to use big nasty passwords like this: First I used apg and I generated 100 passwords which I keep in this same file. Instead of typing user id\&#039;s or passwords, I use the linux mouse to copy strings from the vi window to the browser window.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While not perfect, this scheme has a relatively small number of exposures. I periodically print out the plain text file so I have a disaster recovery solution in case the disk fails.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a very limited encryption solution, consider vim:</p>
<p>The vim editor provides a file encryption service. It is moderately secure encryption that is well described when one enters :help encrypt in the vim editor.</p>
<p>I use a single vim encrypted file for all my passworded logins. The one file has the url, userid and password for each site I access. I make it easy to use big nasty passwords like this: First I used apg and I generated 100 passwords which I keep in this same file. Instead of typing user id\&#8217;s or passwords, I use the linux mouse to copy strings from the vi window to the browser window.</p>
<p>While not perfect, this scheme has a relatively small number of exposures. I periodically print out the plain text file so I have a disaster recovery solution in case the disk fails.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leemon</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6784</link>
		<dc:creator>leemon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7444/#comment-6784</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;The question is: How many one bit errors can a compressed file sustain and still be uncompressed? &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The vulnerability of compressed file systems to bit errors has been very visible to me since I installed a Sony DVD RW AW-G170A. This drive has a major problem writing and reading compressed files. The drive is really in trouble reading a Ubuntu Install CD. The Ubuntu Install CDs of late have a 7mb gz compressed initramfs.gz plus a 698 megabyte squashfs. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I have seen file error situations where the decompression process simply stops with no error message. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But working my way back from a specific CD with bad files to clearly understanding what is the weakness of a specific file compression system is a time consuming process. I am playing around with altering 1 byte in a compressed file and seeing if the decompression is affected.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question is: How many one bit errors can a compressed file sustain and still be uncompressed? </p>
<p>The vulnerability of compressed file systems to bit errors has been very visible to me since I installed a Sony DVD RW AW-G170A. This drive has a major problem writing and reading compressed files. The drive is really in trouble reading a Ubuntu Install CD. The Ubuntu Install CDs of late have a 7mb gz compressed initramfs.gz plus a 698 megabyte squashfs. </p>
<p>I have seen file error situations where the decompression process simply stops with no error message. </p>
<p>But working my way back from a specific CD with bad files to clearly understanding what is the weakness of a specific file compression system is a time consuming process. I am playing around with altering 1 byte in a compressed file and seeing if the decompression is affected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>