LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Windows. LUKS compatible

Re:LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Wi... by mhogomchungu on Saturday June 06, 2015 @03:27AM (#9670030)

People want options and different people want different options. More options means more people will get the options they like best.

In my zuluCrypt project[1],i started with no options because i thought the default options for each supported format was "good enough for everybody" and not long afterwards,the more frequently requested feature was to add more options.

I think more options is good.

[1] http://mhogomchungu.github.io/zuluCrypt/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Wi... by tptacek on Saturday June 06, 2015 @09:28AM (#9670721)

This is why there are still people encrypting with ciphers that use 64-bit blocks: because Schneier wrote one, and people "like" him.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Wi... by Johnny_Brahms on Saturday June 06, 2015 @10:13AM (#9670864)

Blowfish was a good choice at the time, and for some users switching away would cost a lot and give little benefit.

We will say the same about chacha20 in 25 years. It will probably still be secure, but there will be better choices.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Wi... by tptacek on Saturday June 06, 2015 @11:03AM (#9671015)

Blowfish is a block cipher with an 8 byte block. The benefit of switching away from it is not small. Even RC5 would be better choice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LibreCrypt: Transparent on-the-fly disk encryption for Wi... by Johnny_Brahms on Saturday June 06, 2015 @09:16PM (#9673011)

Did you need to restate that it had an 8byte block? It was clearly blowfish you meant from the beginning.

Anyway, before the AES competition most block ciphers had blocks that size and RC5 is still very much patented.

Blowfish was not a bad choice. I stand by that.

[ Parent | on HN ]