DriveCrypt

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by redcell, Nov 14, 2014.

  1. redcell

    redcell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Posts:
    126
    I've used DriveCrypt Plus Pack and DriveCrypt standard before, but I don't recall the standard edition having invisible capability as it's non-OS.

    From their website http://www.securstar.com/products_drivecrypt.php
    5. Invisible Containers
    (DriveCrypt standard edition only)
    The DriveCrypt Standard edition has the ability to create an INVISIBLE disk INSIDE a container or partition. This way you define two passwords for a container. The invisible disks password gives you access to your working disk, which is hidden in the unused area of your "outer" disk, while another password gives you access to the pre-setup DriveCrypt volume in which you only store data that you would want others to believe is the only data in the container or partition. This is very useful in cases where an aggressor may force you to reveal the DriveCrypt disk's password: By revealing the password of the first or "outer" disk, the aggressor will ONLY see the "prepared data": IE data you put in there, before creating the hidden disk, while he will not be able to see or get evidence that there is another invisible container that securely stores confidential data on the disk.


    Would like to know your experiences and views. Thanks.
     
  2. Palancar

    Palancar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,599
    I don't recall that feature either. Candidly, its been quite a few years since I ran plus pack. It performed well. Of course the product is fully closed source so the true integrity of the product is in securestar's hands. You simply must trust them to rely upon the software. No head trip, just pure fact.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
  3. JimmySausage

    JimmySausage Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    53
    Absolutely correct! Unfortunately, since I have no options on the Mac, I have to (somewhat) put put some very little faith in FileVault 2.
    On Windows, I don't have to take that leap of faith. If its closed sourced -goodbye and good luck. Plus, their advertising about 1344 Bit Military Strength Disk Encryption is
    pure giberish. (BS)!
     
  4. Randcal

    Randcal Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2014
    Posts:
    76
  5. S.B.

    S.B. Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Posts:
    150
    In the spy-vs-spy world of cryptology, three letter agencies, covert operations, disinformation and the like, it seems almost self-evident that a test of who "sounds like the most trustworthy" is more likely to establish who can build the best cover story rather than something of actual substance.

    SecureStar has been around for more than a decade. Although I don't currently use SecurStar products, I also don't know of any reasonable facts undercutting the quality or reliability of their cryptography products or services. On the other hand virtually every player in the disk-cryptography field has been the target of innuendo-based attacks at one time or another (for example, I can't even begin to count how many times I read assertions that TrueCrypt must have been compromised since their forum had various rules that various ppl didn't like, etc.)

    Not saying that SecurStar has a platinum pedigree or perfect track record... but I also don't know of any other enterprise in this field capable of passing such a test...

    Edited -- to add that I do agree with Palancar that the closed source nature of SecurStar products is something users should consider. Although open source is not proof of reliability, I personally greatly prefer software with that attribute in this field.

    __
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2014
  6. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,031
    Me, I'm sticking with dm-crypt/LUKS. It's never failed me, and it's open-source.

    I'm rather surprised that it hasn't been ported to OSX. DragonFly BSD has it.
     
  7. Palancar

    Palancar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Posts:
    1,599
    Well I do use dm-crypt/LUKS for my linux system disks. However for external storage I am still a confirmed TrueCrypt addict. I know the code, I have used it for years, compiled it, and I trust it to the max possible (TC version 6.3a for personal reasons). Linux OS plays seamlessly with TrueCrypt, in fact flawlessly for me. I can open my externals on any windows computer if I am traveling around with media. However; most importantly to me (since I store data off premises) is that I have device based hidden volumes. Should an off premises media become an adversarial proposition for me, I have my outer volume "get out of jail free card" to play. Its invaluable for my personal needs.

    Back to the OP's thread. I loved the key logging "blocks" that Plus Pack utilized. I will once again confirm that its a great software product.
     
  8. redcell

    redcell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Posts:
    126
    All these downplay of Securstar and "hail Truecrypt" makes me smile. The responses deviated much from my topic. Oh well nevermind.

    Frankly speaking, I had first hand experiences (facing my adversaries) and also read/heard the news on full disk encryption involvement. DriveCrypt, Bestcrypt, Truecrypt, Diskcryptor .. they all have pros and cons, they all have lifesaving stories to tell.

    So lets all stick with Truecrypt, shall we? :D "sarcasm". Though my personal recommendation is to use a mix of FDE and volume/container encryption.