News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:You Don't Want XTS by tptacek on Thursday May 01, 2014 @02:51PM (#7681920)
Sure, but there's no reason filesystem encryption has to be sequential. The problem isn't with tweakable ciphers; the problem is with ECB-like tweakable ciphers with no authentication.

The LRW paper has some starting points for tweakable ciphers with random access properties. Note that if you're doing filesystem encryption, you have a place you can put a nonce to do randomization. For that matter, you could divide files up into 4k pages and use OCB for the pages.

I don't think I understand your point about handing filesystem drivers untrusted data.

Re:You Don't Want XTS by comex on Thursday May 01, 2014 @02:59PM (#7681969)
If you encrypt at a block level then the pre-authentication parsing code is relatively simple. If you encrypt on top of a filesystem, it's more complicated and relatively likely to have vulnerabilities (seen in practice in iOS at least). It may not be that important, but it's a factor.
Re:You Don't Want XTS by tptacek on Thursday May 01, 2014 @03:24PM (#7682142)
Sure, but it's also the case that encrypting at the block level means that upper-layer filesystem code needs to be prepared to deal with corrupted metadata, which is stored in encrypted sectors that attackers can randomize.