Search Results

Search found 2113 results on 85 pages for 'encryption asymmetric'.

Page 13/85 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • How to get compatibility between C# and SQL2k8 AES Encryption?

    - by Victor Rodrigues
    I have an AES encryption being made on two columns: one of these columns is stored at a SQL Server 2000 database; the other is stored at a SQL Server 2008 database. As the first column's database (2000) doesn't have native functionality for encryption / decryption, we've decided to do the cryptography logic at application level, with .NET classes, for both. But as the second column's database (2008) allow this kind of functionality, we'd like to make the data migration using the database functions to be faster, since the data migration in SQL 2k is much smaller than this second and it will last more than 50 hours because of being made at application level. My problem started at this point: using the same key, I didn't achieve the same result when encrypting a value, neither the same result size. Below we have the full logic in both sides.. Of course I'm not showing the key, but everything else is the same: private byte[] RijndaelEncrypt(byte[] clearData, byte[] Key) { var memoryStream = new MemoryStream(); Rijndael algorithm = Rijndael.Create(); algorithm.Key = Key; algorithm.IV = InitializationVector; var criptoStream = new CryptoStream(memoryStream, algorithm.CreateEncryptor(), CryptoStreamMode.Write); criptoStream.Write(clearData, 0, clearData.Length); criptoStream.Close(); byte[] encryptedData = memoryStream.ToArray(); return encryptedData; } private byte[] RijndaelDecrypt(byte[] cipherData, byte[] Key) { var memoryStream = new MemoryStream(); Rijndael algorithm = Rijndael.Create(); algorithm.Key = Key; algorithm.IV = InitializationVector; var criptoStream = new CryptoStream(memoryStream, algorithm.CreateDecryptor(), CryptoStreamMode.Write); criptoStream.Write(cipherData, 0, cipherData.Length); criptoStream.Close(); byte[] decryptedData = memoryStream.ToArray(); return decryptedData; } This is the SQL Code sample: open symmetric key columnKey decryption by password = N'{pwd!!i_ll_not_show_it_here}' declare @enc varchar(max) set @enc = dbo.VarBinarytoBase64(EncryptByKey(Key_GUID('columnKey'), 'blablabla')) select LEN(@enc), @enc This varbinaryToBase64 is a tested sql function we use to convert varbinary to the same format we use to store strings in the .net application. The result in C# is: eg0wgTeR3noWYgvdmpzTKijkdtTsdvnvKzh+uhyN3Lo= The same result in SQL2k8 is: AI0zI7D77EmqgTQrdgMBHAEAAACyACXb+P3HvctA0yBduAuwPS4Ah3AB4Dbdj2KBGC1Dk4b8GEbtXs5fINzvusp8FRBknF15Br2xI1CqP0Qb/M4w I just didn't get yet what I'm doing wrong. Do you have any ideas? EDIT: One point I think is crucial: I have one Initialization Vector at my C# code, 16 bytes. This IV is not set at SQL symmetric key, could I do this? But even not filling the IV in C#, I get very different results, both in content and length.

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 R2 IPsec encryption in tunnel mode, hosts in same subnet

    - by fission
    In Windows there appear to be two ways to set up IPsec: The IP Security Policy Management MMC snap-in (part of secpol.msc, introduced in Windows 2000). The Windows Firewall with Advanced Security MMC snap-in (wf.msc, introduced in Windows 2008/Vista). My question concerns #2 – I already figured out what I need to know for #1. (But I want to use the ‘new’ snap-in for its improved encryption capabilities.) I have two Windows Server 2008 R2 computers in the same domain (domain members), on the same subnet: server2 172.16.11.20 server3 172.16.11.30 My goal is to encrypt all communication between these two machines using IPsec in tunnel mode, so that the protocol stack is: IP ESP IP …etc. First, on each computer, I created a Connection Security Rule: Endpoint 1: (local IP address), eg 172.16.11.20 for server2 Endpoint 2: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 Protocol: Any Authentication: Require inbound and outbound, Computer (Kerberos V5) IPsec tunnel: Exempt IPsec protected connections Local tunnel endpoint: Any Remote tunnel endpoint: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 At this point, I can ping each machine, and Wireshark shows me the protocol stack; however, nothing is encrypted (which is expected at this point). I know that it's unencrypted because Wireshark can decode it (using the setting Attempt to detect/decode NULL encrypted ESP payloads) and the Monitor Security Associations Quick Mode display shows ESP Encryption: None. Then on each server, I created Inbound and Outbound Rules: Protocol: Any Local IP addresses: (local IP address), eg 172.16.11.20 Remote IP addresses: (remote IP address), eg 172.16.11.30 Action: Allow the connection if it is secure Require the connections to be encrypted The problem: Though I create the Inbound and Outbound Rules on each server to enable encryption, the data is still going over the wire (wrapped in ESP) with NULL encryption. (You can see this in Wireshark.) When the arrives at the receiving end, it's rejected (presumably because it's unencrypted). [And, disabling the Inbound rule on the receiving end causes it to lock up and/or bluescreen – fun!] The Windows Firewall log says, eg: 2014-05-30 22:26:28 DROP ICMP 172.16.11.20 172.16.11.30 - - 60 - - - - 8 0 - RECEIVE I've tried varying a few things: In the Rules, setting the local IP address to Any Toggling the Exempt IPsec protected connections setting Disabling rules (eg disabling one or both sets of Inbound or Outbound rules) Changing the protocol (eg to just TCP) But realistically there aren't that many knobs to turn. Does anyone have any ideas? Has anyone tried to set up tunnel mode between two hosts using Windows Firewall? I've successfully got it set up in transport mode (ie no tunnel) using exactly the same set of rules, so I'm a bit surprised that it didn't Just Work™ with the tunnel added.

    Read the article

  • Why RSA Decryption process takes longer time than the Encryption process?

    - by Tara Singh
    I have some idea that it is due to some complex calculation, but i want to know about what exactly happens which takes long time than the corresponding encryption process. Any link to webpage or paper would be of great help. Thanks Thanks for the answers, One more Doubt, What about the Signing and verification? Will this time difference be there for Signing and verification also? Ex. Signing requires more time than Verification?

    Read the article

  • Why Most Web Services Don’t Use End-to-End Encryption

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Recent revelations about government surveillance have raised the question: why don’t cloud services encrypt your data? Well, they generally do encrypt your data, but they have the key so they can decrypt it any time they like. The real question is: Why don’t web services encrypt and decrypt your data locally, so that it’s stored in an encrypted form no one can snoop on? LastPass does this with your password database, after all.    

    Read the article

  • Encryption Primer for SQL Server Data

    As a database developer or DBA there is not a lot you can do about a legitimate user sharing confidential data. However, you can minimize the risks of someone breaking into our database and browsing around to find confidential information. This article explores how you can use SQL Server features to encrypt your confidential data.

    Read the article

  • Safe non-tamperable URL component in Perl using symmetric encryption?

    - by Randal Schwartz
    OK, I'm probably just having a bad Monday, but I have the following need and I'm seeing lots of partial solutions but I'm sure I'm not the first person to need this, so I'm wondering if I'm missing the obvious. $client has 50 to 500 bytes worth of binary data that must be inserted into the middle of a URL and roundtrip to their customer's browser. Since it's part of the URL, we're up against the 1K "theoretical" limit of a GET URL. Also, $client doesn't want their customer decoding the data, or tampering with it without detection. $client would also prefer not to store anything server-side, so this must be completely standalone. Must be Perl code, and fast, in both encoding and decoding. I think the last step can be base64. But what are the steps for encryption and hashing that make the most sense?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to check if a BIOS supports password entry for a self-encrypting SSD/harddrive?

    - by therobyouknow
    I'm considering purchasing a SSD that has built-in hardware encryption / self-encrypting drive that provides its own full drive encryption. What can I do to check that the BIOS on my machine will support it? Background research so far Research on self-encrypting drives - good article below, but I would need to know if the BIOS can support it: http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Self-encrypting-drives-SED-the-best-kept-secret-in-hard-drive-encryption-security

    Read the article

  • Performance Overhead of Encrypted /home

    - by SabreWolfy
    I have a netbook with Windows on the second partition and Xubuntu (/ and /home) on the third partition. I selected to encrypt my home folder during installation. The performance of the netbook is adequate for the small machine that it is, but I'm looking to improve performance. I could not find much information about the overhead (CPU or drive) associated with home partition encryption. I ran the following, writing to my home partition as well as the the mounted Windows partition: dd if=/dev/zero of=~/dummy bs=512 count=10240 dd if=/dev/zero of=/media/Windows/dummy bs=512 count=10240 The first returned 2.4MB/s and the second returned 2.5MB/s. Can I therefore deduce that there is very little overhead to home folder encryption? I'm not sure if the different filesystems will make any difference (/ and /home are ext3). Update 1 I don't know why I didn't use /tmp instead of the mounted Windows folder. Only /home is encrypted, so /tmp is unencrypted ext3. The results of the dd as above are astounding: ~: 2.4 MB/s /tmp: 42.6 MB/s Comments please? The reason I am asking this is that disk access on the netbook is noticeably slow. Update 2 I timed each of the dd operations with time: ~: real 0m2.217s user 0m0.028s sys 0m2.176s /tmp: real 0m0.152s user 0m0.012s sys 0m0.136s See also: discussion on UbuntuForums.org and bug report Edit: Output of mount: /dev/sda3 on / type ext3 (rw,noatime,errors=remount-ro,user_xattr,commit=600) proc on /proc type proc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) none on /sys type sysfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) fusectl on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw) none on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) none on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw) none on /dev type devtmpfs (rw,mode=0755) none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,noexec,nosuid,gid=5,mode=0620) none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev) none on /var/run type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,mode=0755) none on /var/lock type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) binfmt_misc on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) gvfs-fuse-daemon on /home/USER/.gvfs type fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon (rw,nosuid,nodev,user=USER) `

    Read the article

  • Cannot login in account with encrypted home after update from 11.04 to 11.10

    - by martin
    After upgrading from ubuntu 11.04 to 10.10 I cannot access my encrypted home partition anymore. I can login, however all data stays encrypted. ecryptfs-mount-private gives: ERROR: Encrypted private directory is not setup properly Any idea how to fix this? Update I have several kernels installed (after the upgrade my menu.lst looks like this: http://paste.org/pastebin/view/35591) the problem is the same for all kernels. Booting from 2.6.32-27-generic and adduser --encrypt-home tes gives: Adding user `tes' ... Adding new group `tes' (1008) ... Adding new user `tes' (1007) with group `tes' ... Creating home directory `/home/tes' ... Setting up encryption ... ************************************************************************ YOU SHOULD RECORD YOUR MOUNT PASSPHRASE AND STORE IT IN A SAFE LOCATION. ecryptfs-unwrap-passphrase ~/.ecryptfs/wrapped-passphrase THIS WILL BE REQUIRED IF YOU NEED TO RECOVER YOUR DATA AT A LATER TIME. ************************************************************************ Error: Your kernel does not support filename encryption ERROR: Could not add passphrase to the current keyring adduser: `/usr/bin/ecryptfs-setup-private -b -u tes' returned error code 1. Exiting.

    Read the article

  • Is encoding needed in this decryption?

    - by Lijo
    I have a Encryption – Decryption scenario as shown below. //[Clear text ID string as input] -- [(ASCII GetByte) + Encoding] -- [Encrption as byte array] -- [Database column is in VarBinary] -- [Pass byte[] as VarBinary parameter to SP for comparison] //[ID stored as VarBinary in Database] -- [Read as byte array] -- [(Decrypt as byte array) + Encoding + (ASCII Get String)] -- Show as string in the UI My question is in the decryption scenario. After decryption I get a byte array. I am doing an encoding (IBM037) after that. Is it correct? Is there something wrong in the flow shown above? private static byte[] GetEncryptedID(string id) { Interface_Request input = new Interface_Request(); input.RequestText = Encodeto64(id); input.RequestType = Encryption; ProgramInterface inputRequest = new ProgramInterface(); inputRequest.Test_Trial_Request = input; using (KTestService operation = new KTestService()) { return ((operation.KTrialOperation(inputRequest)).Test_Trial_Response.ResponseText); } } private static string GetDecryptedID(byte[] id) { Interface_Request input = new Interface_Request(); input.RequestText = id; input.RequestType = Decryption; ProgramInterface request = new ProgramInterface(); request.Test_Trial_Request = input; using (KTestService operationD = new KTestService()) { ProgramInterface1 response = operationD.KI014Operation(request); byte[] decryptedValue = response.ICSF_AES_Response.ResponseText; Encoding sourceByteFormat = Encoding.GetEncoding("IBM037"); Encoding destinationByteFormat = Encoding.ASCII; //Convert from one byte format to other (IBM to ASCII) byte[] ibmEncodedBytes = Encoding.Convert(sourceByteFormat, destinationByteFormat,decryptedValue); return System.Text.ASCIIEncoding.ASCII.GetString(ibmEncodedBytes); } } private static byte[] EncodeTo64(string toEncode) { byte[] dataInBytes = System.Text.ASCIIEncoding.ASCII.GetBytes(toEncode); Encoding destinationByteFormat = Encoding.GetEncoding("IBM037"); Encoding sourceByteFormat = Encoding.ASCII; //Convert from one byte format to other (ASCII to IBM) byte[] asciiBytes = Encoding.Convert(sourceByteFormat, destinationByteFormat, dataInBytes); return asciiBytes; }

    Read the article

  • How do I rescue files from the encrypted home folder via live USB stick?

    - by Alexia
    I know, this has been asked and answered all over the internet already. However, I start feeling stupid, since the informations there are not helping me. Just this morning, I wanted to install the newest update to 13.10. After the download, when it came to the actual installing, the install program froze and didn't do anything for hours. At that time, I was still logged in. The computer was working and everything was accessable to me. However, I made the mistake and didn't immediately make safety copies of everything. Instead, I just rebooted. Long story short: My computer even fails to reset to a previous version via Grub. But I am able to boot from a USB stick and, after starting Nautilus, I see my home folder on the HD. I would now like to copy its contents onto an external harddisk. Problem 1: I have no rights to access the folder like that. Problem 2: It is encrypted. Problem 3: I don't know how to give myself the rights to access the folder nor do I know how to encrypt it. I assume that it might help that I still know these things: - my old login name - my old login phrase - a 32 characters long string of hexadecimal numbers that I copied to my list of passwords as "Ubuntu Encryption Code". I copied it digitally right after installing Ubuntu the first time and encrypting the home folder, so there won't be any typos. I am sure of that. The solutions that I saw so far, tell me that I need the "encryption phrase". But when I follow the instructions and use this phrase that I have in my list, I only get messages of denial. Can anyone help me through this special problem, please?

    Read the article

  • How to modify partitions after install?

    - by ChocoDeveloper
    I wanted to have Ubuntu with full disk encryption on one big partition, and Windows on a small one. In 12.04, only the Server Edition installer has full disk encryption, so I used that and then installed ubuntu-desktop. When it asked for the size, I reduced it from ~999GB to ~750gb. Now after the install, on both gparted and disk utility I see /dev/sda2 taking ~931GB, and nothing unallocated, so I can't create a partition for windows. I got the size right, because when I right-click inside a folder, then hit 'properties', I see Free space: ~690GB (I don't know why it's not ~750GB, but at least it's not 900). The command df -h shows the same. So what can I do? Normally I would just resize a partition with gparted to create unallocated space, then create the partition. But here I have two problems: gparted does not seem to be showing the correct values, and also it says it does not support LUKS so I'm afraid it will mess things up. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • is this aes encryption wrapper safe ? - yet another take...

    - by user393087
    After taking into accound answers for my questions here and here I created (well may-be) improved version of my wrapper. The key issue was what if an attacker is knowing what is encoded - he might then find the key and encode another messages. So I added XOR before encryption. I also in this version prepend IV to the data as was suggested. sha256 on key is only for making sure the key is as long as needed for the aes alg, but I know that key should not be plain text but calculated with many iterations to prevent dictionary attack function aes192ctr_en($data,$key) { $iv = mcrypt_create_iv(24,MCRYPT_DEV_URANDOM); $xor = mcrypt_create_iv(24,MCRYPT_DEV_URANDOM); $key = hash_hmac('sha256',$key,$iv,true); $data = $xor.((string)$data ^ (string)str_repeat($xor,(strlen($data)/24)+1)); $data = hash('md5',$data,true).$data; return $iv.mcrypt_encrypt('rijndael-192',$key,$data,'ctr',$iv); } function aes192ctr_de($data,$key) { $iv = substr($data,0,24); $data = substr($data,24); $key = hash_hmac('sha256',$key,$iv,true); $data = mcrypt_decrypt('rijndael-192',$key,$data,'ctr',$iv); $md5 = substr($data,0,16); $data = substr($data,16); if (hash('md5',$data,true)!==$md5) return false; $xor = substr($data,0,24); $data = substr($data,24); $data = ((string)$data ^ (string)str_repeat($xor,(strlen($data)/24)+1)); return $data; } $encrypted = aes192ctr_en('secret text','password'); echo $encrypted; echo aes192ctr_de($encrypted,'password'); another question is if ctr mode is ok in this context, would it be better if I use cbc mode ? Again, by safe I mean if an attacter could guess password if he knows exact text that was encrypted and knows above method. I assume random and long password here. Maybe instead of XOR will be safer to random initial data with another run of aes or other simpler alg like TEA or trivium ?

    Read the article

  • PGP Desktop Whole disk Encryption paused on a toshiba ultrabook z935

    - by garg
    I have a Toshiba z930 Ultrabook with PGP Desktop installed for whole disk encryption. It installed correctly, and started encrypting but it stays paused. If I reboot, it shows me the PGP desktop username, password, domain screen. If I enter in my credentials, it allows me to get into windows but encryption remains paused. If I click on resume, it lets me enter a password, accepts it but then it doesn't do anything. One suspicious thing is that in the 'Select disk or partition to encrypt' box, it says, C: 120B fixed disk. Unknown Bus: TOSHIBA THNSNS12... Do I need to change something in the BIOS, or install any drivers so that it doesn't see it as an Unknown Bus?

    Read the article

  • Belarc Advisor (Store Passwords using Reversible Encryption)

    - by Steve
    Hi, I'm using Belarc Advisor to examine my PC. Part of BA is a security benchmark summary, which examines components of windows security and provides a benchmark rating. Two items are marked as Fail: - Store Passwords using Reversible Encryption - Password History Size I have opened the Local Security Settings tool from the Control Panel Administrative Tools, and ensured that the "Store passwords using reversible encryption" setting is enabled. Also, I've set the password history to a number. So I'm a bit miffed about the Fail marks. Any idea why the Fail marks appear? Any clues how I can Pass them? Thanks, Steve.

    Read the article

  • Best Practices To Build a Product Registration System?

    - by Volomike
    What are some practices I should use in a product registration system I'm building? I likely can't stop all malicious hacking, but I'd like to slow them down a great deal. (Note, I know only PHP.) I'm talking about things like encrypting traffic, testing the encryption from hacking like a man-in-the-middle attack, etc. The other concern I have is that this needs to work on most PHP5-based web hosting environments, which may not have mcrypt installed.

    Read the article

  • How does a web browser save passwords?

    - by marcus
    How do current web browsers (or mobile mail clients and any software in general) save user passwords? All answers about storing passwords say we should store only hashes, not the password themselves. But I'm having a hard time searching the web trying to find the best techniques to store passwords when we know we will need them in plain text later on — without storing them in plain text, without using a weak encryption (known key) and without asking the user for a master password. Any ideas?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >