Page 2 of 2

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 2:11 pm
by Ian
SithTracy wrote:A TrueCrypt volume or GnuPG (Gnu PrivacyGuard/gpg -- OpenPGP) product is the only thing we have ever burned to CD to exchange with a data partner. This new technology does not impress me much.

Please elaborate a bit. I'd like to give some feedback to LG and Nero about this.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:00 pm
by SithTracy
Both TrueCrypt and GnuPG are open source encryption packages.

TrueCrypt is based on E4M and is disc based encryption. Everything is encrypted... you have a file that you mount as a disc volume. You can create a volume of about 650MB (or 4.3GB for DVD) and burn it to the disc. There are a ton of options. You can include TC on the disc and have autorun mount a volume in RO mode, or just mount it yourself (best choice) so no one knows how to open it.

GnuPG is based on OpenPGP. It is primarily used as individual file encryption, but often our clients have us zip multiple files into one large file and we PGP encrypt that. PGP is PKI based encryption and has a very large user and corporate user base. PGP products are available in open source and pay/closed source software (i.e. PGP Corporation CLI or GUI, Authora Egde, Veradis FileCrypt, McAfee e-Business Server). Probably the most popular way to encrypt data.

Although not used much in the corporate world 7-zip (open source file compression) supports AES-256 archives and they can be burned to disk with a SFX.

Additionally, PGP Corp has it's own PGP WDE (whole disc encryption) product that can encrypt an entire partition or container file. The container file is much like TrueCrypt... WDE is for the whole hard disc... not practical for optical drive use. Personally I'm not fond of PGP Corps offerings.

This is a 30,000 foot overview.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:38 pm
by Ian
Yeah, I know what they are. I wanted to know why you like them better.

One downside of both of those solutions that to protect files on optical media, you have to put them in a container or zip them up. Then again, you can't see the file names, etc. like you can with SecurDisc.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:46 pm
by SithTracy
If you are securing truly sensitive data, GnuPG is the only way with TrueCrypt a close second. I know the TrueCrypt developers are working on a RAW support for CD/DVD volumes. No ETA on that.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:00 pm
by Justin42
I've been debating dabbling with TrueCrypt for things like backups DVDs that I don't know what to do with when they get too old to be useful... what exactly is the disadvantage to using it as is (or using GnuPG instead), and/or what would a RAW mode bring? (just the ability to not have the single TC volume as the only file on the disc?)

Just curious since I've been reading up on it quite a bit lately...

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:43 pm
by SithTracy
TrueCrypt might be best for backing up sensitive data for the long term (i.e. multiple files/organized sets).

GnuPG is OpenPGP... signing mail and encrypting files for exchanging with someone.

I use TrueCrypt to protect data volumes on my PC containing tax information, personal data family pictures, etc. I do my best to protect my data on a pc that is always on and connected to the Internet. I occasionally use GnuPG personally; Part of my job has me as the PGP Key administrator. We have 1000+ data exchange partners and exchange and secure sensitive information for our clients either electronically or via optical media sent by courier.

I have often considered making a TrueCrypt volume large enough to put my page file in or my entire Windows profile (%USERPROFILE%)... I'm just plain lazy I guess... plus I'd probably run out of drive letters. I have hard drive partions, three optical drives (on average), a floppy, a card reader that gives 4 drive letters (photography is a hobby, and I don't think I an good at it but others tell me I am... they lie because they love me), usb flash drives and sometime map to old Novell NetWare resources...

Personally I think this SecureDisc technology will have as much of a life span of Yamaha's DiscT@2. And no, I don't own a Lightscribe drive or Labelflash (based on DiscT@2). It's neat technology, but it needs to get better and I think optical drives are dying out as flash memory takes off... Not overnight, but in about 5-10 years time... thanks in no part to Sony/Toshibas war on HiDef optical formats. Are these arguing points? NO. I don't wish to debate on it... I am rarely right anyway!!! At least my wife says I am not!!!

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:53 pm
by SithTracy
Justin42 wrote:what would a RAW mode bring? (just the ability to not have the single TC volume as the only file on the disc?)
This thread on TrueCrypt forum might help you understand better... or it will confuse the hell outta ya! Either way it is interesting to get some perspectives on usage. Seems like it might be a ways off. TC development seems to have gone a bit idle since they started asking for donations. Don't get me wrong, the project is worth a donation... It just seemed to progress more before that.

PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2007 12:36 am
by Ian
Great.. there's another revision of the 1.00 firmware. The retail drive I have has a firmware from 07-03-21. The first drive LG sent me has a firmware dated 07-02-09. The two drives were manufactured a month apart (February and March).

PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2007 12:19 pm
by Wesociety
I hate when they modify the firmware slightly but don't increment the firmware version number. From talking with manufacturers, I have found that this sometimes occurs due to restrictions from OEM customers (the manufacturer fixing a problem, but not giving the appearance that they did indeed increment the firmware version). But in LG's case, they are the manufacturer and the brand, so I'm not sure why they would do it...

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 12:33 pm
by Ian
Great... there's a third version of the 1.00 firmware. posted a review of the GSA-H55L and the firmware on their drive is dated 07-04-18.

I'm not sure if they got a lemon or what, but the writing quality is horrid.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 5:14 pm
by Scour
I´m still not a fan of the new 20x LGs with Panasonic-chipset, saw some horrible scans on other websites :-?

PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 6:49 pm
by Ian
I've been getting less than impressive results with Verbatim +R/-R media.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:07 am
by MDK
what's the difference between h55l and h55n?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:56 am
by SithTracy
MDK wrote:what's the difference between h55l and h55n?

The model that ends in "L" has LightScribe... the one that ends in "N" doesn't.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:25 am
by MDK
SithTracy wrote:
MDK wrote:what's the difference between h55l and h55n?

The model that ends in "L" has LightScribe... the one that ends in "N" doesn't.

tnx and do u recommend it ("l" or "m") to buy?

PostPosted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:16 pm
by Scour
I think L or N don´t have other differences than LS

Still prefer Renesas-Chipset