PDA

View Full Version : Truecrypt 5.0 Released (now with system partition encryption)



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

Sebastian G.
02-10-08, 10:47 AM
nemo_outis wrote:


> No, that's an hack, unsupported by Microsoft.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_loading#Chain_loading_in_boot_manager_programs

And it's no hack since it doesn't require any modifications. heck, it's even
a part or the IBM PC / PS/2 specification.

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:33 AM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618jukF1tb8hhU1@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
>> news:424d41c3a928e32ff32a6de3233c124a@dizum.com:
>>
>> If you can show how an unencrypted partition table can be used to
>> decrypt the drive's contents, do so. If not, STFU.
>
>
> He doesn't have to. The mere fact that the partition table is
> unencrypted is a violation of the security goal.

Whose goal? And why?

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:35 AM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618k32F1tb8hhU2@mid.dfncis.de:

> There is no need to do so. Just let the boot loader on any external
> media load the Windows boot loader (when Windows is stored on the
> disc) and transfer control to it. This is known as boot staging and
> has been done since over thirty years, is absolutely nothing special
> and requires no manipulation.

Peachy! And what the hell will this Windows boot loader then do when all
the HDs on the system (possibly including track zero) are encrypted?

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:39 AM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in news:618k74F1tb8hhU3
@mid.dfncis.de:

Peachy! Except:

1) Microsoft does not support others' boot loaders, and
2) the Windows boot sector, NTLDR, and the rest are all sitting encrypted
on the HDs.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:39 AM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in news:618k83F1tb8hhU4
@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>
>> I didn't say it was difficult, Sebastian, I said it was an unsupported
>> hack. And so it is.
>
>
> It's not a hack, since nothing is manipulated.

It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:40 AM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618kkdF1tpsfvU2@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>
>> No, that's an hack, unsupported by Microsoft.
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_loading#Chain_loading_in_boot_manage
> r_programs
>
> And it's no hack since it doesn't require any modifications. heck,
> it's even a part or the IBM PC / PS/2 specification.

It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.

Wanna go round again?

Regards,

Sebastian G.
02-10-08, 12:30 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in news:618k83F1tb8hhU4
> @mid.dfncis.de:
>
>> nemo_outis wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I didn't say it was difficult, Sebastian, I said it was an unsupported
>>> hack. And so it is.
>>
>> It's not a hack, since nothing is manipulated.
>
> It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.


Well, couldn't you tell us that your stupid way earlier?

Sebastian G.
02-10-08, 12:32 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
> news:618k32F1tb8hhU2@mid.dfncis.de:
>
>> There is no need to do so. Just let the boot loader on any external
>> media load the Windows boot loader (when Windows is stored on the
>> disc) and transfer control to it. This is known as boot staging and
>> has been done since over thirty years, is absolutely nothing special
>> and requires no manipulation.
>
> Peachy! And what the hell will this Windows boot loader then do when all
> the HDs on the system (possibly including track zero) are encrypted?


Working exactly the same way as the pre-boot stuff?

Sebastian G.
02-10-08, 12:33 PM
nemo_outis wrote:


> It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.
>
> Wanna go round again?


If you're expecting anything but a *PLONK* then you're even more stupid than
you've already presented yourself so far.

Sebastian G.
02-10-08, 12:35 PM
nemo_outis, the dirty mail address faker wrote:

> > It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.
> >
> > Wanna go round again?

If you're expecting anything but a *PLONK* then you're even more stupid than
you've already presented yourself so far.

Nomen Nescio
02-10-08, 01:10 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Anonymous <nobody@aes256.cn> wrote in
> news:f6d82b677cb53990d053cc3497b70035 @aes256.cn:
>
> You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say
> again.

You mean this...

"The chapter explains why BestCrypt Volume Encryption (a line in
BestCrypt family of encryption software products) has got Volume
Encryption name. Many people may think that Volume Encryption is the
same as Partition Encryption or even Whole Disk Encryption. Sometimes
it is really so, but not always, and it is worth to learn about the
difference."

*snicker*

George Orwell
02-10-08, 01:30 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> You still don't understand what Bestcrypt is saying. Reread it
> again.

"The chapter explains why BestCrypt Volume Encryption (a line in
BestCrypt family of encryption software products) has got Volume
Encryption name. Many people may think that Volume Encryption is the
same as Partition Encryption or even Whole Disk Encryption. Sometimes
it is really so, but not always, and it is worth to learn about the
difference."

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

Anonymous
02-10-08, 01:36 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> You continue not to understand what Bestcrypt says.

You mean this...

"The chapter explains why BestCrypt Volume Encryption (a line in
BestCrypt family of encryption software products) has got Volume
Encryption name. Many people may think that Volume Encryption is the
same as Partition Encryption or even Whole Disk Encryption. Sometimes
it is really so, but not always, and it is worth to learn about the
difference."

*snicker*

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:39 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618qlkF1tq8ooU1@mid.dfncis.de:


>> It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.

> Well, couldn't you tell us that your stupid way earlier?

If you weren't so stupid you would have picked up that I have been telling
you this repeatedly in a number of previous posts.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:40 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618qo2F1tq8ooU2@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
>> news:618k32F1tb8hhU2@mid.dfncis.de:
>>
>>> There is no need to do so. Just let the boot loader on any external
>>> media load the Windows boot loader (when Windows is stored on the
>>> disc) and transfer control to it. This is known as boot staging and
>>> has been done since over thirty years, is absolutely nothing special
>>> and requires no manipulation.
>>
>> Peachy! And what the hell will this Windows boot loader then do when
>> all the HDs on the system (possibly including track zero) are
>> encrypted?
>
>
> Working exactly the same way as the pre-boot stuff?

I have no idea what your question means - and neither, I suspect, do you.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:42 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618qq9F1tq8ooU3@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>
>> It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.
>>
>> Wanna go round again?
>
>
> If you're expecting anything but a *PLONK* then you're even more
> stupid than you've already presented yourself so far.


Sebastian, to be plonked by you and never again have you make another of
your idiotic replies to my posts would be heaven on earth.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:42 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
news:618qtsF1tq8ooU4@mid.dfncis.de:

> nemo_outis, the dirty mail address faker wrote:
>
> > > It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.
> > >
> > > Wanna go round again?
>
> If you're expecting anything but a *PLONK* then you're even more
> stupid than you've already presented yourself so far.
>

Sebastian, to be plonked by you and never again have you make another of
your idiotic replies to my posts would be heaven on earth.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:42 PM
You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say again.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:43 PM
You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say again.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 01:43 PM
You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say again.

Regards,

Anonymous
02-10-08, 02:08 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Anonymous <nobody@aes256.cn> wrote in
> news:f6d82b677cb53990d053cc3497b70035 @aes256.cn:
>
> You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say
> again.

"The chapter explains why BestCrypt Volume Encryption (a line in
BestCrypt family of encryption software products) has got Volume
Encryption name. Many people may think that Volume Encryption is the
same as Partition Encryption or even Whole Disk Encryption. Sometimes
it is really so, but not always, and it is worth to learn about the
difference."


Jetico doesn't claim Bestcrypt to be WD encryption, in fact they
call it something else completely and go out of their way to make
readers aware that the differences should be considered.

Bestcrypt isn't even mistakenly listed on any independent site that
categorizes or reviews encryption software, as whole disk. Nowhere.

The only one running around like their head is on fire screaming IS
TO! IS TO! IS TO! in between hiding from the aforementioned
description is you

Has it even crossed your mind yet why that might be? Why you think
your interpretation is "right" and the entire rest of the world is
wrong?

There's a medical term for that state of mind, nemo_outis.

Anonymous
02-10-08, 02:17 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
> news:424d41c3a928e32ff32a6de3233c124a@dizum.com:
>
> If you can show how an unencrypted partition table can be used to
> decrypt the drive's contents, do so. If not, STFU.

You've already been given a cite explaining exactly how and why
unencrypted partition tables are a risk. How they can in FACT aid
in the cryptanalysis of an encrypted volume, and you damned well
know it or you wouldn't have made a pathetic attempt to twist
things into some discussion of absolutes.

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 02:24 PM
You still don't understand. Reread what Bestcrypt has to say again.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 02:25 PM
If you can show how an unencrypted partition table can be used to decrypt
the drive's contents, do so. If not, STFU.

Wanna go round again?

Regards,

George Orwell
02-10-08, 02:45 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in
> news:618kkdF1tpsfvU2@mid.dfncis.de:
>
> > nemo_outis wrote:
> >
> >
> >> No, that's an hack, unsupported by Microsoft.
> >
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_loading#Chain_loading_in_boot_manage
> > r_programs
> >
> > And it's no hack since it doesn't require any modifications. heck,
> > it's even a part or the IBM PC / PS/2 specification.
>
> It is a hack since Microsoft doesn't support it.

That's sort of like saying CorningWare doesn't support baked chicken
because they don't specifically give you a recipe. Never mind the specs
regarding oven temperatures, since it doesn't say "Good for Chicken!"
on the box tetrazzini is a "hack" in the Nimrod_Outhouse dictionary of
self serving redefinitions.

Damn sonny, you lost like three this week? Bestcrypt, Truecrypt, and
bootstrapping?

Is that a personal best, or have you actually done better?

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

Nomen Nescio
02-10-08, 02:50 PM
bealoid wrote:

> George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in
> news:c55c038c9722894a88f01af8c6244801@mixmaster.it:
>
> > nemo_outis wrote:
> >
> >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer <anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
> >> in news:24250861f8cfd5a440460111e28b78d8@remailer.cyberiade.it:
> >>
> >> Windows cannot boot from a completely encrypted disk because there's
> >> nothing to decrypt those first bytes to even get the process started.
> >
> > Wanna bet? If I post a link that proves Windows can boot
> > from a 100% encrypted device, including the MBR, WITHOUT
> > using any other software or copying any information at
> > all to or from anywhere, will you put on your clown suit
> > and dance for us, then leave?
>
> I'm not that person, but I'd be interested to see the link please.
>
> How secure is ATA Disk encryption? There seem to be many tools to unlock
> discs.

Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.

Arguably, hardware could be the only "pure" form of FD-OTFE since all
other schemes require an unencrypted stub somewhere, and almost
certainly it's what the poster was referring to. It fits all the
requirements... OS booting from a thoroughly encrypted drive, no MBR
tricks, no third party software, pre-boot auth, etc...

So yes, one can "boot Winblows from a completely encrypted drive". And
yes, it's a pretty obvious answer when you think about it.

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 10:35 PM
Are you still blithering on?

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-10-08, 10:47 PM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Are you still blithering on?
>
> Regards,

Well, he, and the others, have all aptly shown you where you have erred.
And all you seem capable of doing is pretending they haven't.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:09 PM
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
news:ae9ee50c01782b4fbd6fc89b61779692@dizum.com:


> Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
> drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
> drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
> conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.

Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems (besides the
possibility of backdoors) that generally render it suitable only for
"light duty" use (although the situation is slowly improving):

1) The HD spec itself provides for a 2-level (user & admin) password
locking (not encryption) scheme for ALL compliant IDE/SATA drives without
which drive access (in the ordinary way) is impossible. Many laptops
have supported this for years (including a handoff in the BIOS to avoid a
lot of manual thrashing about) and it has migrated to a few desktop style
machines (i.e. MBs) as well. The problem is a) by definition the key is
squirreled away on that very same HD somewhere, and b) the data is not
encrypted, only access is blocked. While this thwarts most users there
are a number of specialty data recovery houses that can unlock such
drives. I used to use ATAPWD to mess with these passwords manually.

2. Seagate is the only HD manufacturer which provides native HD
encryption. Seagate Momentus laptop 2.5-inch drives provide a halfway
decent encryption scheme (and Seagate has promised to migrate the
technology to desktop, etc. 3.5-inch form factor drives "real soon now").
It uses 3DES encryption (in ECB mode?) and stores the key in a chip on
the drive electronics. How secure this chip is, is open to question.

3. There are a number of add-on boards for do-it-yourself hardware
encryption. I've posted about them on this and other newsgroups in the
past. Most of these are only 40-bit (sheesh!) although a few are 128-bit
or 3DES. Moreover, all the common ones only use ECB mode with no salt,
etc. - which, to put it mildly, stinks! There may be some better boards
available from some specialty manufacturers but they are far from
mainstream.

In short, hardware encryption is a great idea, but (most of?) the current
implementations are not ready for prime time.

And even when a really good hardware HD encryption system comes along
there will likely still be the problem that (almost all) hardware is
inherently closed source (unless you want to burn your own FPGA :-)

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-10-08, 11:14 PM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in news:1v-
dnZsaGO2jWDLanZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@giganews.com:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>> Are you still blithering on?
>>
>> Regards,
>
> Well, he, and the others, have all aptly shown you where you have erred.
> And all you seem capable of doing is pretending they haven't.
>
> Regards,


No, his points were completely answered long ago, even though he - and now
you - seem too stupid to realize it. I could, I suppose, reply with the
standard order a judge gives when someone raises - for the umpteenth time -
a question that was already responded to much earlier:

Asked and answered - move on!

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-10-08, 11:36 PM
nemo_outis wrote:

> No, his points were completely answered long ago, even though he - and now
> you - seem too stupid to realize it. I could, I suppose, reply with the
> standard order a judge gives when someone raises - for the umpteenth time -
> a question that was already responded to much earlier:
>
> Asked and answered - move on!

Please, you can pretend to be correct to your heart's desire.
Nobody will be offended by your ostentatious charade.
In the end the only person you'll be harming is yourself.
But, whatever you do, don't think for one moment that
we don't know that you are pretending to be correct.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 12:00 AM
Larry, it's a free country - believe whatever you wish, no matter how
stupid it is.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 12:07 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Larry, it's a free country - believe whatever you wish, no matter how
> stupid it is.

Well, that may be your modus operandi, but I prefer to make my decisions
based upon the evidence presented.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 12:48 AM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in news:v9adnRgwb-
q1RTLanZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@giganews.com:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>> Larry, it's a free country - believe whatever you wish, no matter how
>> stupid it is.
>
> Well, that may be your modus operandi, but I prefer to make my decisions
> based upon the evidence presented.

Feel free to call whatever dreck you wish evidence, and then feel free to
misinterpret it however suits you.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 12:55 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in news:v9adnRgwb-
> q1RTLanZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> nemo_outis wrote:
>>> Larry, it's a free country - believe whatever you wish, no matter how
>>> stupid it is.
>> Well, that may be your modus operandi, but I prefer to make my decisions
>> based upon the evidence presented.
>
> Feel free to call whatever dreck you wish evidence, and then feel free to
> misinterpret it however suits you.

How did I know that's what you would say?

Probably because that's all you can say.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 01:00 AM
Are you still blithering on?

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 01:23 AM
An accurate indication of a person's overall worth to society would
be their ability
to admit to being wrong when shown to be so by more than one person, on
several
different occasions. I think it's fair to say that over the past few
days you have
gravely missed many opportunities to rectify your mistakes. And, in so
doing, you
have disclosed a very apparent lack of any mental fortitude, or true
integrity of spirit
and strength of character.

To put it bluntly, you have revealed yourself as being rather worthless.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 01:35 AM
Are you still blithering on?

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 01:36 AM
No.


Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 01:39 AM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in
news:wq6dnfXacpyWcDLanZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@giganews.com:

Still blithering, I see.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 01:41 AM
Wrong.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 01:59 AM
Still blithering.

Nomen Nescio
02-11-08, 02:02 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in news:1v-
> dnZsaGO2jWDLanZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
> > nemo_outis wrote:
> >> Are you still blithering on?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >
> > Well, he, and the others, have all aptly shown you where you have erred.
> > And all you seem capable of doing is pretending they haven't.
> >
> > Regards,
>
>
> No, his points were completely answered long ago,

Just keep telling yourself that, if it lets you live with the
embarrassment.

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 02:13 AM
Once again, you're pretending to be right.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:15 AM
More blithering!

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 02:17 AM
Todd H. wrote:
> Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> writes:
>
>> An accurate indication of a person's overall worth to society would
>> be their ability to admit to being wrong when shown to be so by more
>> than one person, on several different occasions. I think it's fair
>> to say that over the past few days you have gravely missed many
>> opportunities to rectify your mistakes. And, in so doing, you have
>> disclosed a very apparent lack of any mental fortitude, or true
>> integrity of spirit and strength of character.
>>
>> To put it bluntly, you have revealed yourself as being rather
>> worthless.
>
> You've put a fine point on my collective observation (from reading in
> alt.computer.security) of Nemo as well.
>
>

Thank-you, Todd.

--Larry

Todd H.
02-11-08, 02:19 AM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> writes:

> An accurate indication of a person's overall worth to society would
> be their ability to admit to being wrong when shown to be so by more
> than one person, on several different occasions. I think it's fair
> to say that over the past few days you have gravely missed many
> opportunities to rectify your mistakes. And, in so doing, you have
> disclosed a very apparent lack of any mental fortitude, or true
> integrity of spirit and strength of character.
>
> To put it bluntly, you have revealed yourself as being rather
> worthless.

You've put a fine point on my collective observation (from reading in
alt.computer.security) of Nemo as well.


--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

George Orwell
02-11-08, 02:24 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in news:v9adnRgwb-
> q1RTLanZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
> > nemo_outis wrote:
> >> Larry, it's a free country - believe whatever you wish, no matter how
> >> stupid it is.
> >
> > Well, that may be your modus operandi, but I prefer to make my decisions
> > based upon the evidence presented.
>
> Feel free to call whatever dreck you wish evidence, and then feel free to
> misinterpret it however suits you.

You should write Jetico and let them know their doc pages are dreck.

Don;t forget the folks at Truecrypt too.

Ya' idiot.

>
> Regards,
>
>

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

George Orwell
02-11-08, 02:24 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Are you still blithering on?

<laugh!>

I don't believe I've ever seen you get your ass kicked so badly.

>
> Regards,

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:28 AM
More blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:31 AM
Ahh, the blitherers are out in force tonight.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:31 AM
More blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:32 AM
Are you still blithering on?

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 02:34 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> More blithering from you.

And now, you've been reduced to a monotonous, repetitive droll.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 02:37 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Ahh, the blitherers are out in force tonight.

And you are worthless.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 02:40 AM
"Are you still blithering on?", said the Pretender.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:52 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:53 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 02:53 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

George Orwell
02-11-08, 02:55 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
> news:ae9ee50c01782b4fbd6fc89b61779692@dizum.com:
>
>
> > Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
> > drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
> > drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
> > conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.
>
> Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems

********. HardWARE encryption has historically been not only more
secure and robust, but considerably faster than software encryption for
obvious reasons.

Take your arguing for the sake of arguing and shove it. Nobody cares to
hear it.

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:04 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

It's obvious you have no self-respect and no self-worth.

Even to yourself you are worthless.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:08 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

It's obvious you have no self-respect and no self-worth.

Even to yourself you are worthless.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:10 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

It's obvious you have no self-respect and no self-worth.

Even to yourself you are worthless.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 03:10 AM
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in
news:4955767a4780e41c11a89a77666c9796@mixmaster.it:

More blithering from you!

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 03:10 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 03:12 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 03:13 AM
Yet more blithering from you.

Joseph Ashwood
02-11-08, 03:23 AM
I haven't been paying much attention to this thread, just showing back up.

"George Orwell" <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
news:4955767a4780e41c11a89a77666c9796@mixmaster.it...
> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
>> news:ae9ee50c01782b4fbd6fc89b61779692@dizum.com:
>>
>>
>> > Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
>> > drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
>> > drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
>> > conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.
>>
>> Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems
>
> ********. HardWARE encryption has historically been not only more
> secure and robust, but considerably faster than software encryption for
> obvious reasons.


I actually have to agree with Nomen on this one. The hardware systems
available are widely inferior. I won't name any names (mostly because I'm
trying to forget about them) but there has been suppliers of "secure"
hardware hard disk encryption alternatives that were enormously insecure.
The errors have been everything from a fixed key across all devices, to
using ECB, to "accidently" creating a broadcast antennae out of the key
transport, often combining multiple problems in a single product. With
knowledge of such mistakes having been made, I would say that hard disk
encryption "suffers from problems" when performed in hardware.
Joe

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:27 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

"Blithering" is not a word.
You mean "blathering", you worthless idiot.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:39 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

What does 'blithering' mean? I think you are referring to 'blathering'?

Now let's see if you will admit to making this mistake.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:43 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Yet more blithering from you.

Tell us what 'blithering' means.
I think you want to use the word 'blathering'.

Now let's see if you will admit to this mistake.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:47 AM
Larry Whittington wrote:

> "Blithering" is not a word.

I was wrong. Blithering is a word.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:49 AM
Larry Whittington wrote:

I now know what blithering means.
I learned something new today.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 03:53 AM
Larry Whittington wrote:

I learned something new today.

I now know what blithering means.

It means 'blathering', the word I was thinking of.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 04:01 AM
> "Blithering" is not a word.
> You mean "blathering", you worthless idiot.

"Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 04:04 AM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in
news:R4GdnZDbX_MplC3anZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@giganews.com:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>> Yet more blithering from you.
>
> What does 'blithering' mean? I think you are referring to 'blathering'?
>
> Now let's see if you will admit to making this mistake.
>
> Regards,


"Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 04:05 AM
Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in
news:R4GdnZPbX_NSly3anZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@giganews.com:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>> Yet more blithering from you.
>
> Tell us what 'blithering' means.
> I think you want to use the word 'blathering'.
>
> Now let's see if you will admit to this mistake.
>
> Regards,
>

"Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 04:29 AM
nemo_outis wrote:
> Larry Whittington <larry245@infostreet.net> wrote in
> news:R4GdnZPbX_NSly3anZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> nemo_outis wrote:
>>> Yet more blithering from you.
>> Tell us what 'blithering' means.
>> I think you want to use the word 'blathering'.
>>
>> Now let's see if you will admit to this mistake.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>
> "Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
> American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.
>

I know, you worthless dreg of society.

I admit to my mistakes. Let's see if you will admit to yours.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 04:29 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> "Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
> American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.

I know, you worthless dreg of society.

I admit to my mistakes. Let's see if you will admit to yours.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 04:29 AM
nemo_outis wrote:

> "Blithering" is recognized in Merriam-Webster's, in Random House, in
> American-Heritage and assorted other dictionaries, you blithering idiot.

I know, you worthless dreg of society.

I admit to my mistakes. Let's see if you will admit to yours.

Regards,

George Orwell
02-11-08, 07:29 AM
Joseph Ashwood wrote:

> I haven't been paying much attention to this thread, just showing back up.
>
> "George Orwell" <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
> news:4955767a4780e41c11a89a77666c9796@mixmaster.it...
> > nemo_outis wrote:
> >
> >> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
> >> news:ae9ee50c01782b4fbd6fc89b61779692@dizum.com:
> >>
> >>
> >> > Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
> >> > drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
> >> > drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
> >> > conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.
> >>
> >> Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems
> >
> > ********. HardWARE encryption has historically been not only more
> > secure and robust, but considerably faster than software encryption for
> > obvious reasons.
>
>
> I actually have to agree with Nomen on this one. The hardware systems
> available are widely inferior. I won't name any names (mostly because I'm
> trying to forget about them) but there has been suppliers of "secure"
> hardware hard disk encryption alternatives that were enormously insecure.
> The errors have been everything from a fixed key across all devices, to
> using ECB, to "accidently" creating a broadcast antennae out of the key
> transport, often combining multiple problems in a single product. With
> knowledge of such mistakes having been made, I would say that hard disk
> encryption "suffers from problems" when performed in hardware.
> Joe
>

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
02-11-08, 08:40 AM
Joseph Ashwood wrote:

> >> Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems
> >
> > ********. HardWARE encryption has historically been not only more
> > secure and robust, but considerably faster than software encryption for
> > obvious reasons.
>
>
> I actually have to agree with Nomen on this one. The hardware systems
> available are widely inferior. I won't name any names (mostly because I'm
> trying to forget about them) but there has been suppliers of "secure"

You're wrong, apparently because you're relying on anecdotal evidence.

But the sturdiness of hardware encryption and it's security relative to
software (the terms alone should give you a clue), is completely
irrelevant to the topic at hand. Nimrod made a fool of himself by
claiming one could not boot windows from an encrypted drive without an
unencrypted stub, copying an unencrypted stub to the drive, or a couple
other boneheadded guesses at how something like that might be done. His
narrow little mind let him down, and all the while he's acting like a
pompous *******.

So now he's gotten himself spanked 4 or five times in as many days, and
been reduced to snipping and trying to flood his embarrassment away
with drivel. That's actually unusual for Nimrod. Not the spankings, the
sheer volume in such a short period of time. But then, Nimrod doesn't
generally hang in places like sci.crypt he tends to cower in less
populated areas like APAS, where he can convince himself he's some sort
of "witty expert" or whatever it is Nimrod fancies himself.

Sebastian G.
02-11-08, 09:47 AM
George Orwell wrote:

> nemo_outis wrote:
>
>> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in
>> news:ae9ee50c01782b4fbd6fc89b61779692@dizum.com:
>>
>>
>>> Actually, there's all sorts of hardware based encryption for hard
>>> drives. AES256 is becoming pretty popular in replacement notebook
>>> drives I hear. As to "back doors", I'll happily leave that to the
>>> conspiracy nuts. It's not relevant to this particular debate anyway.
>> Hard disk encryption currently suffers from problems
>
> ********. HardWARE encryption has historically been not only more
> secure and robust, but considerably faster than software encryption for
> obvious reasons.


This hardware stuff has been notoriously insecure because it always uses ECB
mode. Never seen anything else.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:01 AM
Back to blithering, I see.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:02 AM
Back to blithering, I see.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:02 AM
Back to blithering, I see.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:04 AM
Are you still blithering on?

Henrique Mandalin
02-11-08, 10:04 AM
You're wrong, ****face.

Regards,

Henrique Mandalin
02-11-08, 10:04 AM
You're wrong, ****face.

Regards,

Henrique Mandalin
02-11-08, 10:04 AM
You're wrong, ****face.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:22 AM
Oh, another blitherer.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:23 AM
Oh, another blitherer.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:23 AM
Oh, another blitherer.

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 10:27 AM
Actually, I was responding to your post from my room-mate's computer.
I had forgotten where I was.

But anyway, you little pecker-headed ****face, you need to take a reading
comprehension course yourself. If you do, you'll see that I was explaining
to you that I had discovered that 'blithering' was indeed a word. But it is
synonymous to 'blathering', the very word I mistook 'blithering' for.

Man, you got **** for brains, if you can't figure that out for yourself.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 10:27 AM
Actually, I was responding to your post from my room-mate's computer.
I had forgotten where I was.

But anyway, you little pecker-headed ****face, you need to take a reading
comprehension course yourself. If you do, you'll see that I was explaining
to you that I had discovered that 'blithering' was indeed a word. But it is
synonymous to 'blathering', the very word I mistook 'blithering' for.

Man, you got **** for brains, if you can't figure that out for yourself.

Regards,

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 10:27 AM
Actually, I was responding to your post from my room-mate's computer.
I had forgotten where I was.

But anyway, you little pecker-headed ****face, you need to take a reading
comprehension course yourself. If you do, you'll see that I was explaining
to you that I had discovered that 'blithering' was indeed a word. But it is
synonymous to 'blathering', the very word I mistook 'blithering' for.

Man, you got **** for brains, if you can't figure that out for yourself.

Regards,

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:40 AM
You're still blithering.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:40 AM
You're still blithering.

nemo_outis
02-11-08, 10:40 AM
You're still blithering.

Larry Whittington
02-11-08, 10:43 AM
You're still blathering.

Regards,