Re: [Fed-Talk] Whole Disk Encryption?
Re: [Fed-Talk] Whole Disk Encryption?
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Whole Disk Encryption?
- From: "Wm. Cerniuk" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:52:25 -0600
A full restore, or any user account restore, or any object (file, data record) level restore?
If a disk driver (encryption system or not) has negative impact with the file IO system, it is a red flag (danger Will Robinson). Whole disk encryption should be completely transparent to any and all applications and the file sub-system. It is nothing more than a mass storage driver presenting the standard block IO storage command-responses.
V/R,
Wm. Cerniuk
Ph: 703.594.7616
On Jan 21, 2010, at 6:56 PM, Robert Nicholson wrote:
> I think I heard from WinMagic that Time Machine restores are not supported with SecureDoc
>
> On Jan 21, 2010, at 7:46 AM, Nichols, Jared - 1160 - MITLL wrote:
>
>> We use SecureDoc and it works pretty well. The only issue, which is I think
>> inherent of all full disk encryption products, is that when something goes
>> wrong, it only goes wrong very badly.
>>
>> We work very closely with SecureDoc and making sure that the latest Apple
>> hardware and OS is supported by their product. (The first Unibody MBP threw
>> them for a loop with the new grphics card.) The only hangup is that when
>> there's a new OS point release, if the SecureDoc product doesn't yet support
>> it and the user updates their machines, they'll brick it.
>>
>> I know, big problem.
>>
>> We get around this by putting machines with SecureDoc in a separate upgrade
>> cycle so that they do not get forced OS updates. We pay much more attention
>> to these machines to ensure that the updated SecureDoc that supports the new
>> point release is pushed to machines first, and then we'll enable the updated
>> OS for them.
>>
>> One major down-side is that if you're going from say 10.5 to 10.6, you need
>> to do a full decrypt, upgrade to 10.6, then a full re-encrypt. Long
>> process.
>>
>> j
>>
>>
>> On 1/20/10 8:24 PM, "Robert Nicholson" <email@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any opinion on experiences from SecureDoc WDE and PGP WDE? PGP WDE
>>> has 10.x which now supports Snow Leopard but SecureDoc already supports Snow
>>> Leopard. PGP WDE seems to be considerably easier to buy than SecureDoc from
>>> what I can tell and I like that PGP has a support forum that's active. I've
>>> seen PGP WDE work reliably in Leopard but have no experience with it in Snow
>>> Leopard. Has anybody been able to find out how much SecureDoc for Snow Leopard
>>> actually costs? Personally I hate the whole reseller model it's so out of
>>> date. _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>>
>>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>
>> ---
>> Jared F. Nichols
>> Desktop Engineer, Client Services
>> Information Services Department
>> MIT Lincoln Laboratory
>> 244 Wood Street
>> Lexington, Massachusetts 02420
>> 781.981.5436
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden