Best encryption sw for home laptop

Hadron Quark wrote:

> Not according to the traveller mode information : it includes the
> encrypted file and necessary truecrype executables to open that file
> up.

Yes, but the device driver must be installed on the system wrt.
generating the relevant driver information. This requires administrator
rights. Once the driver information is in there, nothing more is needed
and the next time it will work directly.

> That sounds to be true : if an attacker could replace the travelling
> code with his own he could prompt for passphrase and comprimise it.

Same goes for self-decryption executables.

Sebastian Gottschalk

In article <>
Sebastian Gottschalk <> wrote:
>
> TwistyCreek wrote:
>
> > http://www.truecrypt.org/user-guide/?s=traveller-mode
>
> No, I didn't miss that. The users will still need to download
it or get
> is transfered through a secure channel, and install at least
the device
> driver. In any case, it is not pre-installed on Windows and
the user
> need to get it from somewhere - which was the obvious intent
on that
> question.
>
> > There is also, or use to be, a "self decrypting" option for
PGP files
> > where the encrypted file also contains enough of the program
to decrypt
> > the file when the password is entered.
>
> And this is a very stupid idea. The attacker can simply modify
the
> executable part to mail the password to him as well.

That's true of any encryption program.

> Now verifying the
> executable bogs down to already having a verifier program,
which just
> mirrors the initial situation...

No, it doesn't.

I cannot mail a truecrypt file to (or Bestcrypt or FreeOTFE or
PGPdisk container) to a recipient who doesn't have those
programs installed on his machine, and who doesn't have admin
privilieges. That is the situation with most government and
many industry computers.

I CAN, however, create a self-executing encrypted ZIP file
(WinZip10 has secure encryption) to such a recipient, so long as
a I have an alternate means of transmitting the password.

I haven't found any other secure means of sending encrypted data
to such a recipient.

Demosthenes

Demosthenes wrote:

> I CAN, however, create a self-executing encrypted ZIP file
> (WinZip10 has secure encryption) to such a recipient, so long as
> a I have an alternate means of transmitting the password.
>
> I haven't found any other secure means of sending encrypted data
> to such a recipient.

What about the attacker simply changing the executable part so it
compromises that password?

Sebastian Gottschalk

In article <>
Sebastian Gottschalk <> wrote:
>
> Demosthenes wrote:
>
> > I CAN, however, create a self-executing encrypted ZIP file
> > (WinZip10 has secure encryption) to such a recipient, so
long as
> > a I have an alternate means of transmitting the password.
> >
> > I haven't found any other secure means of sending encrypted
data
> > to such a recipient.
>
> What about the attacker simply changing the executable part so
it
> compromises that password?

The attacker wouldn't have to bother if I sent the file in the
clear.

That's the alternative.

Demosthenes

In article <>
Hadron Quark <> wrote:
>
> Sebastian Gottschalk <> writes:
>
> > TwistyCreek wrote:
> >> Sebastian Gottschalk <> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> So, they (the recipient) definitely need truecrypt
installed?
> >>> Which is a requirement for every such scenario. I guess
the only and
> >>
> >> Utter nonsense. PGP has SDA's and Truecrypt has "Traveller
Mode".
> >
> > And both require the installation of a device driver. And
they both must
> > be present on the recipients system
>
> Not according to the traveller mode information : it includes
the
> encrypted file and necessary truecrype executables to open
that file
> up.

I can tell you from experience that you must have administrator
rights on the recipient's machine for traveller mode to work.

And the documentation says so, although you have to look to find
it.

The same is true of FreeOTFE, PGPDisk, BestCrypt.

Demosthenes

Anonymous-er (Demosthenes) wrote:

> > Not according to the traveller mode information : it includes
> the
> > encrypted file and necessary truecrype executables to open
> that file
> > up.
>
> I can tell you from experience that you must have administrator
> rights on the recipient's machine for traveller mode to work.

But neither one requires the installation of a device driver. I can see
where someone might make the mistake regarding Truecrypt, but believing
this to be true for PGP SDA's is nothing but ignorance.

It's hard to say for sure from the OP's description, but it sounded
like admin rights weren't a barrier. That was Gobbleslop's red herring.

Non scrivetemi

Demosthenes wrote:

> I can tell you from experience that you must have administrator
> rights on the recipient's machine for traveller mode to work.

No, just initially. Once the driver is set up, it works as a restricted
user.

Sebastian Gottschalk

Non scrivetemi wrote:

>> I can tell you from experience that you must have administrator
>> rights on the recipient's machine for traveller mode to work.
>
> But neither one requires the installation of a device driver. I can see
> where someone might make the mistake regarding Truecrypt, but believing
> this to be true for PGP SDA's is nothing but ignorance.

Ignorance is that you don't even understand the technical details: For
mounting the new format as a file system, you need to install the new
file system device driver. And only admins are allowed to do so.

If no driver is needed, then you don't have a file system.

Sebastian Gottschalk

Demosthenes wrote:

>> What about the attacker simply changing the executable part so
>> it compromises that password?
>
> The attacker wouldn't have to bother if I sent the file in the
> clear.
>
> That's the alternative.

Essentially there's no difference.

No, the alternative is telling the recipient where to find the software,
transfer it through a secure channel or use a preinstalled software.

Sebastian Gottschalk

Sebastian Gottschalk <> wrote:

> Demosthenes wrote:
>
> >> What about the attacker simply changing the executable part so
> >> it compromises that password?
> >
> > The attacker wouldn't have to bother if I sent the file in the
> > clear.
> >
> > That's the alternative.
>
> Essentially there's no difference.

One way the data is securely encrypted in a container that *might* be
vulnerable to a specific attack that can't go unnoticed even if it
succeeds, and the other way your data is out in the clear so that
anyone and their retarded cousin can get to it.

Yeah, no difference at all.

Moron.

Borked Pseudo Mailed