Encryption Software

rrinc · 2008-03-01T03:57:51+00:00

For those of you that encrypt stuff, I'm curious what do you use for encryption. I came across this awesome program: TrueCrypt The fake volume (for when you'...

rrinc

Yeah, I'm running XP on a 3Ghz (overclocked) Core 2 Duo and 2GB RAM. As much as I'd like to believe it, I don't think Vista will run quite as well as I want it to on this hardware.
I too prefer XP's graphics. I actually prefer the Windows Classic theme...it gets the job done.

loloyd

Nice thread. From encryption to Vista vs XP ad nauseum.
I normally don't encrypt filesystems, nor files. If I wanted to, I could just use WinRAR and put in a password. At home, and I am whispering this so that my kids won't hear :-D, I use NTFS ACL to block other users access to certain folders. Oh wait, I also use that method at work. And it's quite good enough to fool the laziest of my colleagues (they give up too easily).
But I've also come across TrueCrypt in the past. I've downloaded it but I never really used it. What's the name for this kind of sickness?
In the meantime, I'll stick with my XP. Experience tells me to stick with it and leave Vista to those who can afford to pay for the extra stuff I can do without anyway for way faster than the things they paid for. Sound like bla bla bla? Yeah, to me too.

Tom Chapman

You guys either simply havn't tried Vista on your machines or you're just making assumptions based on other's oh so very political views.
I run Windows Vista Ultimate on a AMD Atholon 3500+ (2.2Ghz) with 1492 MB (DDR2) of RAM. To compliment my setup, I use the NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GS.
It runs as fast as my old XP set up. It manages my physical memory much more efficiently and is far more secure than previous Microsoft operating systems for number of reasons including file permissions, UAC (I have it set up to prmpt for a password every time. Yup.) and the modificiations to the Kernal which are the cause for games running 'more slowly' on Vista systems than XP systems. Why is this? The graphics drivers were moved out of the kernal layer for added security making them run more slowly because they were no longer able to interface directly with the hardware.
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/vista/kernel-en.mspx

loloyd

I've run several laptops on Windows Vista Business Edition (OEM) in the past (late 2007 for an end of year project). All the laptops were of the same model - the cute little Acer TravelMate 6292. The little buggers scored a range from low 3's to 3.5 in the Vista Performance Index. Admittedly, file transfers were experienced blazingly faster, 3 Gigs in less than 40 seconds over UTP direct crossover link. I think that's impressive.
I and my colleagues also got to play around with many of Vista's settings, but I didn't really like the way it INSISTED on always switching back to the inefficient Aero theme. We also played with the User Access Control (UAC) feature and turned off the pesky security alert that asks you to confirm every little thing you wanted to do with the system. I also noted another security enhancement in Vista wherein it caches DB connections and erases raw connection strings from memory - this is apparently done so that hackers using memory mappers may be deterred from figuring out DB connection strings. XP does not exhibit this form of security tightness. However, we also experienced some drawbacks with our programs due to these kinds of changes and we had to fine-tune or revisit the way we issue DB connects to make our programs Vista-compatible.
Overall, we had very mixed feelings with regard to embracing Vista as an everyday OS. Some of us liked it. Some of us didn't. I ultimately didn't. And I also didn't like the Acer TravelMate 6292 - it's just too small.
I guess it would be "harder" to hook to the Vista kernel now, something that's been a security problem with XP but also a simplicity godsend if you know what you're doing and trust enough the programs you use that hook to the OS kernel.
Besides, I still run old machines, like an AMD Duron 700 MHz at home. And it runs XP quite comfortably well, loaded with server apps, office apps, custom apps, etc. - this is something Vista will not be able to brag about.

Tom Chapman

Vista is a fair few years more recent than XP, it's not designed for your 0.700 Ghz systems lol
My system gets a big fat 2.8.. Maybe the lower the number the better? :D

loloyd

Newer releases of Linux (or Ubuntu) are also a fair few years more recent then their oldest versions. But the latest versions of which can still run on legacy hardware systems that I described above.
In the Vista Performance Index, I'm sorry to say that the opposite applies, the higher the number, the better. :-D

Tom Chapman

Linux and Windows can't really be compared. They're two toltally different OSs! Mac OSX and Windows can be to a certain degree, but, once more, they're both very different >.>
And, ha ha very funny >:<

loloyd

Beware of Microsoft's business methods.
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/01/17/finland-gates-finnish-children-shackled/
Have you heard of the OLPC programme? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olpc Did you look at Microsoft's panicky response to that one? Microsoft will lose OS leverage once every government in the world, through each of its own educational institutions, adopts open source software. You can already see the "shackling" methods of Microsoft with the onset of Vista ("you need this hardware to enjoy our software") and then there's the similar arm-twisting with Windows Live and the student editions of its key software development platforms (Visual Studio, etc.).
I'm just saying. :-D
And why can't I compare Linux to Windows? They're both operating systems.

olly86

I have tried Vista, it lasted five minutes before the new "security" features, and massive speed decrees annoyed me, so I returned to good old reliable XP. I went as far as getting my money back from the shop I borough it from, as it didn't work as expected, so therefore false advertising.
And before you say my hardware wasn't good enough I was running it on a Pentium D (3 Ghz), and 2GB DDR 2 RAM.
And just to prov how much of an issue Microsoft may have in the future, I've just finished my university dissertation, and the only peace of Ms software I've used is the OS. I didn't need any of their servers or programming tools to complete my project.

Tom Chapman

Is there a secret "slow mode" no ones telling me about or what? XD

greolian

I would recommend trying Encrypt Files if I were you.
Can encode individual files or even entire directories.
Offers a great variety of encryption strengths including the unbreakable Blowfish with 448 bit.
Encryption speed is fast and source files can be securely shred.
When encrypting, it keeps the file name and size but turns it into unusable data.
Operates with the use of passwords.
Disadvantage: Doesn't provide a context menu function.
Completely Freeware
Website: www.encryptfiles.net

« Previous Page