EncFS Security Audit

Re:EncFS Security Audit by albinoloverats on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @06:44AM (#7384879)

Nice to see this kind of report, even if the conclusion is rather damning.

And it seems to suggest that using it with (something like) Dropbox is a bad idea too:

> EncFS is not safe if the adversary has the opportunity to see two or more snapshots of the ciphertext at different times.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EncFS Security Audit by mysteriousllama on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @06:56AM (#7384906)

Boxcrypter uses EncFS. Combined with the vulnerabilities discussed in this audit, this is pretty bad.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EncFS Security Audit by icebraining on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @08:01AM (#7385058)

Boxcrypter uses EncFS.

Not anymore: https://forums.boxcryptor.com/topic/opening-linux-encfs-encr...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EncFS Security Audit by nieve on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @08:25AM (#7385129)

Is the current, non-EncFS compatible version open source for the crypto components or audited by anyone reputable? If not we don't necessarily have any reason to believe it's safer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EncFS Security Audit by tjaerv on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @09:08AM (#7385305)

Indeed, a priori one would have to assume it less secure than an open-source implementation that has been reviewed by experts. "We built our own" merely amounts to security through obscurity.

[ Parent | on HN ]