Comments on: Removable disk encryption with dm-crypt/LUKS http://segfault.in/2010/03/removable-disk-encryption-with-dm-crypt-luks/ vinod's blog Wed, 20 Apr 2011 03:52:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Abhishek Shrivastava http://segfault.in/2010/03/removable-disk-encryption-with-dm-crypt-luks/#comment-2529 Abhishek Shrivastava Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:55:39 +0000 http://segfault.in/?p=757#comment-2529 Thanks, worked like a charm ! Thanks, worked like a charm !

]]> By: Iswar Cse http://segfault.in/2010/03/removable-disk-encryption-with-dm-crypt-luks/#comment-68 Iswar Cse Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:16:16 +0000 http://segfault.in/?p=757#comment-68 dm command for hard disk dm command for hard disk

]]> By: Links 26/3/2010: Mobinnova Dumps Windows for Linux, Miro 3.0 Gains Subtitles | Boycott Novell http://segfault.in/2010/03/removable-disk-encryption-with-dm-crypt-luks/#comment-67 Links 26/3/2010: Mobinnova Dumps Windows for Linux, Miro 3.0 Gains Subtitles | Boycott Novell Fri, 26 Mar 2010 22:56:46 +0000 http://segfault.in/?p=757#comment-67 [...] Removable disk encryption with dm-crypt/LUKS [...] [...] Removable disk encryption with dm-crypt/LUKS [...]

]]> By: Eric Moore http://segfault.in/2010/03/removable-disk-encryption-with-dm-crypt-luks/#comment-66 Eric Moore Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:06:00 +0000 http://segfault.in/?p=757#comment-66 I noticed you tested for bad sectors, but didn't comment on how tolerant dm-crypt/LUKS would be if any occur later on. <br><br>The reason I ask is TrueCrypt has a reputation for being very error tolerant of bad sectors. It also has a option for backing up volume headers. Could you elaborate on how robust dm-crypt/LUKS is and if there anything practical you can do to make it more tolerant?<br><br>I'm far more concerned about losing my data than the possibility of "very expensive hardware probing to recover the data. "<br><br>note: I used a bogus email address as your commenting system requires a valid email address to even post as a guest, and doesn't state anywhere whether the email address will be displayed. <br><br>I also saw a red square that said: "Warning: A browser setting is preventing you from logging in. Fix this setting to log in." However, clicking on that link just displayed the article again. I noticed you tested for bad sectors, but didn't comment on how tolerant dm-crypt/LUKS would be if any occur later on.

The reason I ask is TrueCrypt has a reputation for being very error tolerant of bad sectors. It also has a option for backing up volume headers. Could you elaborate on how robust dm-crypt/LUKS is and if there anything practical you can do to make it more tolerant?

I'm far more concerned about losing my data than the possibility of “very expensive hardware probing to recover the data. “

note: I used a bogus email address as your commenting system requires a valid email address to even post as a guest, and doesn't state anywhere whether the email address will be displayed.

I also saw a red square that said: “Warning: A browser setting is preventing you from logging in. Fix this setting to log in.” However, clicking on that link just displayed the article again.

]]>