New since your last visit

Forums

• Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  15 years ago

  Fri May 14 2010, 09:55am

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  So, as I continue my journey into No Man's Land (aka HeretoforeUnexploredWindows7Features), I discovered something today that I thought I should make you aware of.
  
  BitLocker Drive Encryption
  
  
  
  
  Courtesy of Wikipedia: Contrary to the official name, BitLocker Drive Encryption is a logical volume encryption system. A volume may or may not be an entire drive, and can span one or more physical drives. BitLocker is included with the Ultimate and Enterprise editions of Microsoft's Windows Vista and Windows 7 desktop operating systems, as well as the Windows Server 2008 and Windows Server 2008 R2 server platforms. It is designed to protect data by providing encryption for entire volumes. By default it uses the AES encryption algorithm in CBC mode with a 128 bit key, combined with the Elephant diffuser for additional disk encryption specific security not provided by AES.
  
  The latest version of Bitlocker, included in Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2, adds the ability to encrypt removable drives.
  
  Now, encrypting data on removable drives sounds like a good idea to me. I really don't want my personal data available to anyone who might find a USB drive that I misplace or lose. So, with that in mind, using Windows 7 Ultimate I encrypted an 8GB USB flash drive yesterday. Apparently, the BitLocker To Go executable file is copied to the newly encrypted drive, and will allow Windows XP SP3 and Vista SP1 machines to access the encrypted drive (after the password has been entered).
  
  
  
  
  
  However, on the Windows XP SP3 machine that I use at the office, I was was told that the inserted flash drive was 'not formatted'. After a bit of digging, it turns out that removable drives have to be formatted with the FAT32 file system for BitLocker To Go to work.
  
  Which of course, is a bit backward, since there are plenty of occasions on which you might want to copy a file larger than 4 gigabytes to your removable drive. You may recall that I posted a thread called How to Format a USB drive with NTFS recently. It now seems that if you want to use your BitLocked removable USB flash drive on Windows XP or Windows Vista, you will have to revert it to the FAT32 filesystem.
  
  Does anybody else have any experience using BitLocker Drive Encryption? Any problems to report?
  
  
   
• Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  
  So, for the 4 of you that have viewed this thread so far (yes, just FOUR people have viewed a technical thread on a technical website...):
  
  I think that unless you're only going to be using your removable flash drive between Windows computers, and unless those are all running Windows 7... it's not worth using BitLocker Drive Encryption.
  
  That's because what should be a transparent and easy process is complicated by the fact that on non-Windows 7 machines, once you've made sure that your removable flash drive is FAT32 formatted, you can only VIEW A LISTING of the files on the drive, and copy them off to a different drive. You cannot access them normally.
  
  First of all, this is all you can see in Windows Explorer:
  
  
  
  Now, if you've got Autorun disabled (like most sane people should), you have to manually run the BitLockerToGo program:
  
  
  
  After you've entered your password, you get presented with a window that looks like this, showing you the files on the drive:
  
  
  
  The problem here is, this is not a proper Windows Explorer window - double-clicking on any file shown here produces this message:
  
  
  
  OK, so it seems you can't run them directly from this odd "BitLocker To Go Reader" window - you're forced to copy them before you can use them. But you can't even copy them to the flash drive!! If you attempt to, this is the message you get:
  
  
  
  So, overall, I'd say don't bother with BitLocker unless you're ONLY using Windows 7 on all the computers you want to plug your 'protected' flash drive into. Otherwise, it's just a pain in the butt.
  
  
  
  
   
• Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  You could just dump the stuff into a zip file with a password if you want simple encryption. :D
   
• SpEks

  • Registered Member #24
  • Joined: Sun Feb 12 2006, 05:13pm
    
  • Location: Gauteng
  • Posts: 1614
    

  
  picked up 100 armour.
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  SpEks

  • Registered Member #24
  • Joined: Sun Feb 12 2006, 05:13pm
    
  • Location: Gauteng
  • Posts: 1614
    

  
  picked up 100 armour.
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  Not on Win XP Home you can't! (I assume you are talking about the built-in Windows password function there, Hawk.) !grin
   
• Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  Well use 7-zip, WinRar, winzip or something to create the archive and just put a password on it. I've never used the windows default .zip creator so I haven't really tested it.
   
• Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  
  Well use 7-zip, WinRar, winzip or something to create the archive and just put a password on it.
  

  Hawk

  I want my encryption to be transparent/seamless/fast. WinZip/WinRAR/7zip/etc do not offer this.
  
  BitLocker does... but only in specific scenarios. So BitLocker should be improved, in my opinion :)
  
  
   
• Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  ]
  

  
  Well use 7-zip, WinRar, winzip or something to create the archive and just put a password on it.
  

  Hawk

  I want my encryption to be transparent/seamless/fast. WinZip/WinRAR/7zip/etc do not offer this.
  
  BitLocker does... but only in specific scenarios. So BitLocker should be improved, in my opinion :)
  
  
  

  Morgue[FLB

  
  Deal breaker.
  
  Doing the whole password protected archive theme is cross platform (Linux and Mac included.) It may not be as elegant as this whole BitLocker deal, but it's functional (and doesn't require me to stick to only Win 7.)
  
  Not saying BitLocker is bad, just saying that if you want basic encryption it may be less effort to use a .zip with a password on it.
  
  P.S. The a new feature in Ubuntu allows you to automatically encrypt your home directory, i.e when you login it gets unlocked and gets locked when you logout.
  
   
• Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  15 years ago

  Fri May 21 2010, 01:59pm

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  
  Not saying BitLocker is bad, just saying that if you want basic encryption it may be less effort to use a .zip with a password on it.
  

  Hawk

  I'm not saying BitLocker is bad either ;)
  
  And actually, it's more effort to use a passworded .ZIP file. Ideally, encryption should be transparent to the user, a seamless experience that doesn't require passwording specific files. What if I forgot to zip+password my financial docs on my USB and left it at the office, only to find the disk gone the next day? But with BitLocker, all files on the drive are encrypted all the time, and a password is required to access the drive. So there's no effort required to ZIP and password the file on one computer, and then unzip the file on another computer - every time you want to access the file. Multiply that effort (and time used) by the amount of files you want to access on the drive.
  
  BitLocker is LESS effort - but only when it "works as advertised". That is to say, only when used in a certain way (between Windows 7 machines). Ultimately, it would benefit all consumers if BitLocker became cross-platform.
  
  

  
  P.S. The a new feature in Ubuntu allows you to automatically encrypt your home directory, i.e when you login it gets unlocked and gets locked when you logout.

  Hawk

  Useful, and sounds similar to BitLocker. Note that the BitLocker I've been talking about so far is BitLocker To Go. The non-mobile version of the technology allows you to encrypt your system disk, providing the same type of protection that Ubuntu then offers.
  
   
• Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  15 years ago

  Fri May 21 2010, 07:49pm

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Hawk

  • Registered Member #217
  • Joined: Mon Sep 18 2006, 04:12pm
    
  • Location: Pretoria
  • Posts: 2752
    

  
  Resident Linux Fanboi!
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  ]
  
  I'm not saying BitLocker is bad either ;)
  
  And actually, it's more effort to use a passworded .ZIP file. Ideally, encryption should be transparent to the user, a seamless experience that doesn't require passwording specific files. What if I forgot to zip+password my financial docs on my USB and left it at the office, only to find the disk gone the next day? But with BitLocker, all files on the drive are encrypted all the time, and a password is required to access the drive. So there's no effort required to ZIP and password the file on one computer, and then unzip the file on another computer - every time you want to access the file. Multiply that effort (and time used) by the amount of files you want to access on the drive.
  
  BitLocker is LESS effort - but only when it "works as advertised". That is to say, only when used in a certain way (between Windows 7 machines). Ultimately, it would benefit all consumers if BitLocker became cross-platform.
  

  Morgue[FLB

  
  +1
  
  
  

  ]
  
  Useful, and sounds similar to BitLocker. Note that the BitLocker I've been talking about so far is BitLocker To Go. The non-mobile version of the technology allows you to encrypt your system disk, providing the same type of protection that Ubuntu then offers.
  
  

  Morgue[FLB

  
  Sounds cool, is bitlocker a default in Windows 7? Or does it only come with Ultimate/Proffesional?
  
   
• Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  15 years ago

  Options

  • Email
  • Print
  

  Morgue[FLB]

  • Registered Member #59
  • Joined: Wed Mar 08 2006, 11:21am
    
  • Location: Durbanville, /\/¯¯¯¯¯̀̀̀ˇ¯\/\
  • Posts: 5225
    

  
  :: Mortal Wombat ::
  

  Level 10

  Options

  • Email
  • Print

  
  15 years ago

  ---

  
  Sounds cool, its bitlocker a default in Windows 7? Or does it only come with Ultimate/Proffesional?
  

  Hawk

  A good question. Straight from the Wiki's mouth:
  

  
  BitLocker Drive Encryption is a full disk encryption feature included with the Ultimate and Enterprise editions of Microsoft's Windows Vista and Windows 7 desktop operating systems, as well as the Windows Server 2008 and Windows Server 2008 R2 server platforms.
  

  Wikipedia

  :)