Thoughts on SafeBoot

In article <bduc19$qhg$1$>, "Simon Hunt" <> wrote:
>One more comment like that Nemo and I'm doubling the prices
>
>VDisk 2 will be on the web site in a couple of days. Slimmer, faster etc.
>
>Simon.
>

Now you see the oppression inherent in the system

Regards,

nemo outis

One other little glitch that I noticed in my short time with BestCrypt (but
forgot to mention) was that it couldn't figure out where to install the
Start/Programs group shortcuts. It always installed them in the Windows
default, not in the current user profile. So, the user who installed the
software (currently logged on) could not see the BestCrypt shortcuts from
the Start/Programs menu without digging for them with Windows Explorer or
equivalent. I've never had that happen before with the hundreds of titles I
use or have tried, and it was surprising coming from what appears to be a
relatively mature product. By the way, this was on a Win98 machine...I
didn't try it on XP.


"Vdiskker" <***@*.net> wrote in message
news:sbEMa.106$ .com...

> BestCrypt seemed to work well, but it installed tons of things outside its
> own directory also. Not only files, but it added 37 keys and 65 values to
> the registry, and even when specifying not to install BCWipe during
> installation, you still get references to that program. The feature that I
> liked most about BestCrypt was the convenient ability to block deletion of
> containers (set by default), but I can handle this in other ways. Also,
some
> obscure error messages (caused by 2 initial faulty installations) had
> misspelled words and grammatical errors...spelling and grammar issues are
> not that big of a deal, but it just doesn't build confidence when you see
> these things. By the way, the faulty installs seemed to be caused by TDS3
> blocking installation of certain files as I couldn't get a clean install
> until TDS3 and its auto-protect module were shut down...that in itself
kinda
> concerns me).

Vdiskker

Simon Hunt wrote:
> Over a million? Oh, come now John.... If it was over a million you wouldnt
> need another round of funding to bail you out
>
> Simon.
>

Since when are you a financial expert? That's new to me!
Thanks for calling me a liar...

But from our website:

"* secured data on more than 1,5 million computers world-wide"

....
John

John Veldhuis

What's new in VDisk 2?

Not much externally - we removed the HTML interface, it was very pretty but
made the runtime image around 12MB because it loaded up IE and Java - the
new version is less than 1/3 of that and of course much faster because it
does not need IE any more. We also fixed a couple of things in the driver
which meant that VDisk to VDisk copying would eat up a lot of memory - in
fact all of it if left to it's own devices. eToken Pro and R2 drivers are
included as standard, as well as a driver for Microsoft CSP's so you can
protect a VDisk using your NT credentials or Windows Logon Smartcard. Other
changes were to add support for a pure SCSI Bus driver version which let you
do multiple partitions on a VDisk, as well as RAID etc, but we've decided
not to release that bit to the general public because the P&P architecture's
not happy about drives coming and going.

Simon.

"Vdiskker" <***@*.net> wrote in message
news:sbEMa.106$ .com...
> Thanks, guys for the comments.
>
> I installed and tried briefly PGP (ckt build) for the PGPDisk feature, but
> the program installs an insane amount of stuff on the PC (registry and
> files). It also forces the install into a folder called PGP even if you
> specify another folder...for instance, if specifying "z:\programs\secure"
> using the installer's "browse" function, as soon as you go to the next
> installation step, it appends PGP to the chosen directory, e.g
> "z:\programs\secure\pgp". There was no way around this. That "glitch"
wasn't
> a deal killer, but it was an extreme annoyance. I don't know if the latter
> is true of the PGP Corp. version.
>
> BestCrypt seemed to work well, but it installed tons of things outside its
> own directory also. Not only files, but it added 37 keys and 65 values to
> the registry, and even when specifying not to install BCWipe during
> installation, you still get references to that program. The feature that I
> liked most about BestCrypt was the convenient ability to block deletion of
> containers (set by default), but I can handle this in other ways. Also,
some
> obscure error messages (caused by 2 initial faulty installations) had
> misspelled words and grammatical errors...spelling and grammar issues are
> not that big of a deal, but it just doesn't build confidence when you see
> these things. By the way, the faulty installs seemed to be caused by TDS3
> blocking installation of certain files as I couldn't get a clean install
> until TDS3 and its auto-protect module were shut down...that in itself
kinda
> concerns me).
>
> Vdisk worked well and seemed to be the least intrusive on the rest of the
> system, but certainly not as unobtrusive as the original freeware
Scramdisk.
> I think that Scramdisk was a model for "do your job and do it without any
> fanfare".
>
> I'll probably go with Vdisk to get XP compatibility.
>
> Simon,
>
> What's new in version 2. Hopefully not anything that adds to the registry
> debris.
>
> Thanks.
>
>

Simon Hunt

Well, you (Utimaco)also claim to be aplying for CC EAL 3, how ever, I cannot
find this info anywhere else than on your website. Could you provide me with
one?

Added to this you (again on your website) have an article on some
magazine(?) testing this type of solutions.

Nice text, but with some major flaws (why am I not surprised when a German
magazine tests a German product ):

Where is Safeboot?
Why is Pointsec version 4.0 tested? (According to their web-site launched on
November 27, 2000, also according to the website 4.1 got FIPS in April 2002,
and I have used 4.2 for over a year)

So that is all I have to say about info posted on a company web site! It is
mostly BS!

/J0hnny

on your website you also claim to have CC sertificate, but the CC pages
don't seem to know that
"John Veldhuis" <> wrote in message
news:be0n4t$11jdfn$...
> Simon Hunt wrote:
> > Over a million? Oh, come now John.... If it was over a million you
wouldnt
> > need another round of funding to bail you out
> >
> > Simon.
> >
>
> Since when are you a financial expert? That's new to me!
> Thanks for calling me a liar...
>
> But from our website:
>
> "* secured data on more than 1,5 million computers world-wide"
>
> ...
> John
>

J0hnny

Hi Simon,

OK, no hard feelings.

> Perhaps though I am wrong in assuming that a high percentage of your
> customers are indeed taking advantage of any support or maintenance
> contract.

Well, you know SafeGuard Easy. It is probably too easy, so people
sometimes might think a support/maintenance contract is superfluous.

Groetjes
John

John Veldhuis

Frode wrote:
> This ain't a jab btw. I have no interest whatsoever in your customer base,
> previous or current. I just think that a number like that should be
> supported by disclosing how it was arrived at for it to have any
> credibility.

I think I have to agree on that...

Groetjes
John

John Veldhuis

J0hnny wrote:
> Well, you (Utimaco)also claim to be aplying for CC EAL 3, how ever, I cannot
> find this info anywhere else than on your website. Could you provide me with
> one?

I am working on that.

> Added to this you (again on your website) have an article on some
> magazine(?) testing this type of solutions.
>
> Nice text, but with some major flaws (why am I not surprised when a German
> magazine tests a German product ):

There's also a test from a UK magazine.

> Where is Safeboot?

See the test from the UK magazine.

> Why is Pointsec version 4.0 tested? (According to their web-site launched on
> November 27, 2000, also according to the website 4.1 got FIPS in April 2002,
> and I have used 4.2 for over a year)

You'd have to ask the people from the magazine.

> So that is all I have to say about info posted on a company web site! It is
> mostly BS!

Of course a lot of it is marketing babble, but there are (or should be)
no lies on it.
About our site: that it is available since the launch of Windows 95 is
indeed imprecise, I still have a DOS version lying around.


Groetjes,
John

John Veldhuis

J0hnny wrote:
> Well, you (Utimaco)also claim to be aplying for CC EAL 3, how ever, I cannot
> find this info anywhere else than on your website. Could you provide me with
> one?

http://www.bsi.de/zertifiz/zert/aktuelle.pdf

Groetjes
John

John Veldhuis

I bought and used DriveCrypt Plus Pack and encrypted my C:drive and my
programs partition AND my backups partition. (second hard drive).. and
then aftermonths of use, the program suddenly wouldn't accept my
password! Boy was I screwed! The designer of DCPP, Mr. Hafner,
responded immediately to my email and I called him. Through a process
of elimination, we discovered that the problem was my KEYBOARD (and
maybe my BIOS version)! My monitor showed a correct password, but
when we connected my keyboard to a different pc, it was apparent that
two of my aschii characters were not working. I bought a new keyboard
and was able to get into my system.. In the process, I learned a
lesson the hard way, that I have to be able to access backups in case
I need to reformat my hardrive and re-install my OS... now I don't
encrypt 'it...I make an accessible "CLEAN" copy (nothing incriminating
on it) in case I need one.

I think that a program such as DCPP is the way to go to prevent
"authorities" from ever being able to search your computer....BUT,
don't put yourself in a situation where your data is irretreviably
lost due to a hardware problem.. Encrypt your crucial data, but use
DriveCrypt with 1044 bit container encryption to burn a CD( or PGP, or
whatever), so you won't lose everything IF the worst happens..then
hide that CD. Also, follow the "rescue" instructions for if/when the
worst happens" when you buy your program, and export everything
necessary in case the worst does happen... in other words, export
those key stores and such to floppy disks, along with the "rescue.exe"
programs necessary to use them.

I want to publicly thank Mr. Hafner and DriveCrypt Plus Pack for their
customer service, EVEN when I had not bought a service contract.

I recommend their products and their company: www.securstar.com




On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:54:57 GMT, "Vdiskker" <***@*.net> wrote:

>Thanks.
>
>To begin, I do understand the distinction between full drive encryption and
>container encryption; the original post from Skulking Rogue just asked about
>Safeboot, so it is unclear (to me) whether he was referring to Solo or
>Vdisk. Is it a safe assumption that anyone asking about Safeboot is
>referring to the total drive encryption product (Solo) as opposed to the
>container encryption product (Vdisk)? I specified Vdisk because the other
>responses seemed to focus on Solo and that is not, as I explicitly stated,
>what I'm interested in. I have concerns about any solution that provides
>total drive encryption, regardless of how stable it purportedly is. A safer
>solution, in my opinion, against total loss of data due to one glitch in one
>piece of software (Solo or any other complete drive encryption software), is
>to put your data in multiple containers and back them up periodically. If
>one container fails, you're not out the time and expense of trying to
>restore a complete computer, regardless of how elegant a solution the vendor
>has for disaster recovery. Plus, why do I want to have to mess with the slow
>down / possible interference with applications...why do I need Photoshop and
>all its components encrypted? Just my take on it. I can see the point with a
>laptop, but barely. Maybe my fears are unfounded, but it seems just as easy
>to potentially lock yourself out of your computer due to a software glitch
>as it would be to lock out a data thief using full drive encryption. Using
>the container option does require that you know about data leaks, temp file
>storage used by applications, etc. and maybe people don't want (or know how)
>to deal with that. I find dealing with those things less daunting than the
>concern of my computer going belly up because of a bug in the full drive
>encryption software. But maybe that's just me, as a lot of people do like
>the total drive encryption solution.
>
>Anyway, when I said I could skip the [email] / file encryption stuff in PGP,
>I meant the one-at-a-time file or folder encryption. These files for me, if
>requiring encryption, would be placed in the container created by PGPDisk.
>So, that is to answer your question of why I would need PGP if I didn't need
>[email] / file encryption. As far as I know, PGP does offer individual file
>encryption and the PGPDisk container functionality as separate and distinct?
>If not, then I understand your confusion. As far as email, I avoid sending
>anything that would require encryption, anyway, so it would not be useful to
>me.
>
>Also, I believe the latest version of the PGP ckt build (658ckt build 0
>that I downloaded does provide PGPDisk functionality. I just don't know if
>it works with XP.
>
>Oh, yea, and I do agree that the DriveCrypt / DCPP licensing scheme is a
>turn off. Forget to mention that, so thanks.
>
>That's about it. Thank you for your previous response and any you may post
>in the future.
>
>
>
>"Frode" <> wrote in message
>news:...
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Vdiskker wrote:
>> > You might have a dead link even with the original hyperlink, but I would
>> > rather go with losing the original link than having the original link
>> > still available but not accessible because the Tiny Url is no longer
>> > valid. Am I missing something here? (Not meant to be smartass, just
>> > wondering if my concern is valid).
>>
>> It's valid. I just don't really care if a link is gone in a year. I post
>it
>> to answer a person at this time. Not for someone to check in a decade. I
>> had a quick google and found a few from a year back and they're still
>> working so it's not like they die in a week. Of course, you're free to not
>> use it. I ain't forcing noone. Just offering it as info for those who are
>> unaware of it and have a problem with long links wrapping. I find it very
>> convenient.
>>
>> > Anyway, do you have the same high regard for Safeboot Vdisk? I have been
>>
>> Never used it I'm afraid. It's container encryption, yeah? I use PGP Disk
>> for that. Quite happy with it. Safeboot Solo is complete harddrive
>> encryption so they're not comparable.
>>
>> > I've seen some of the discussions in the Scramdisk newsgroup, and
>> > DriveCrypt gets sniped pretty badly (I think a lot is based on no open
>> > source and because the owner seems to have a "hacker" past?).
>>
>> Personally I have no exprience with their container encryption products.
>> They might be very good, but people seem to be having issues with their
>> recently introduced licensing system. As far as DC Plus Pack (complete
>> harddrive encryption like SBS) I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. It costs
>> 3 times as much as SBS and will happily render your system unbootable if
>> you have a crash or powerfailure while it's encrypting. Those two items
>> combined makes it a very poor purchase in my opinion.
>>
>> It doesn't seem complete harddrive encryption is what you're after though,
>> so I'm really ill equipped to offer much since the only product I have
>> experience with is PGP Disk. But I'm sure others will answer you shortly
>
>>
>> > I downloaded the latest PGP ckt build, but I haven't installed it
>because
>> > it seems to have a lot of things I may not use, plus I don't want to
>> > hassle with the key registration (it is a hassle, is it not?).
>>
>> Dunno if that's an issue at all with ckt builds. As far as I know the
>> released sourcecode for the older versions don't have any licensing code
>in
>> it. But I bought 8.0 and I didn't find it a hassle at all. Put in my name,
>> my key, hit a button, waited 5 sec and all done. There's also a text file
>> one can keep around if needing to reinstall or something. Have a google
>for
>> pgpprefs.txt if curious. It was covered here not long ago.
>>
>> > could be convinced to use the PGPDisk, should I go with the PGP
>>
>> Have a look at your needs. Base your decision on that. PGP Personal isn't
>> very expensive at $50 I think, but if cost is a big issue then others may
>> be cheaper or even free for all I know. If it's complete harddrive
>> encryption you need, I can't see anything beating SBS at the moment.
>>
>> > corporations version or use the ckt build?
>>
>> I don't think ctk builds have PGP Disk..?
>>
>> > Can PGPDisk be used without the email/file encryption stuff,
>>
>> If you don't want to encrypt email nor files, what do you need it for...?
>> If you're asking if you can install and forget about email protection and
>> just use it for container encryption, the answer is yes. Just skip
>> installing any email plugins. Even if you install them you can just decide
>> to not use. You can also protect your container files or single files via
>> passphrase only and thus not have to contend with the keys issue.
>>
>> > and is its encryption as strong (the
>> > website just said "128 bit or higher"...what exactly does that mean?).
>>
>> Beats me. I'm not well versed in all the different options you have. I
>just
>> know I use 256bit twofish for my container encryption and have a 4096bit
>> key for my email protection.
>>
>>
>> - --
>> Frode
>>
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: PGP 8.0.2
>>
>> iQA/AwUBPwCC7OXlGBWTt1afEQIp/QCfa8qqb0viYSI9ZibjNsSsewUCYgQAoM0C
>> 9S1JCKv0ga4d1odV68cNC6II
>> =Z1LI
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>


__________________________________________________ ____________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

urge2@kornet.net