Search Results

Search found 2089 results on 84 pages for 'encryption'.

Page 15/84 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

• What to do with a Blowfish Key?

  - by Encoderer

  I just completed backing up 8 years of my Gmail using http://gmvault.org I selected the --encrypt option which uses Blowfish encryption. According to their site: Emails can be encrypted with the option -e --encrypt. With that option, the Blowfish encryption is used to crypt your emails and chats and the first time you activate it, a secret key is randomly generated and stored in $HOME/.gmvault/token.sec. Keep great care of the secret key as if you loose or delete it your stored emails won't be readable anymore !!! I'm using OSX Lion. I'm a software engineer but far from an encryption expert. What should I do with this key? It seems like leaving it where it is now (alongside the emails) sort of misses the point of encrypting them to begin with.

  Read the article

• How is my password sent across when I check gmails/access bank site [closed]

  - by learnerforever

  What encryption is used when my password is sent across in gmails/when I do online banking? RSA? DSA? Public-private key encryption?. In key encryption, which entity is assigned a public/private key? Does each unique machine with unique MAC address has a unique public/private key? Does each instance of browser have unique key? Does each user have unique private/public key? How does session key come into picture? How do machines receive their keys?

  Read the article

• Chrome - SSL Security issue on Windows platforms?

  - by al nik

  Fortify.net is a service that displays what's the currently encryption key used by your browser in a https connection. If I browse this site with Chrome 4.1.249.1042 in WinXp SP3 the key used is RC4 cipher, 128-bit key This encryption is weak, and it's the one used by old browsers like IE6. Chrome works fine on Fedora9 and it uses AES cipher, 256-bit key as more modern browsers do (i.e.Firefox) I consider this a security issue. I'm considering to switch back to Firefox in Windows. Do you know if it's possible to change the default encryption key in Chrome?

  Read the article

• What do encrypted files' data look like?

  - by Frost Shadow

  I know there are a lot of encryption programs available, that I would guess use different methods for encryption, and thus have different types of output files (.fve .tc .cha .dmg (bitlocker, truecrypt, challenger, ect.)), but if someone didn't know what the file was and just looked at the data, what would it look like? Does it just look like random bits, or can you still pick out a pattern? If it does look random, how is it if I moved the encrypted file to another computer, the other computer can tell it's a file, and is able to decrypt it (how would it even know where to start or stop, if it all looked random)? Also, how is the structure affected by encrypting files twice, using the same method, or a different one? Thanks for any help, and if you know any books or site about encryption for complete idiots, I'd appreciate it!

  Read the article

• Can I save & store a user's submission in a way that proves that the data has not been altered, and that the timestamp is accurate?

  - by jt0dd

  There are many situations where the validity of the timestamp attached to a certain post (submission of information) might be invaluable for the post owner's legal usage. I'm not looking for a service to achieve this, as requested in this great question, but rather a method for the achievement of such a service. For the legal (in most any law system) authentication of text content and its submission time, the owner of the content would need to prove: that the timestamp itself has not been altered and was accurate to begin with. that the text content linked to the timestamp had not been altered I'd like to know how to achieve this via programming (not a language-specific solution, but rather the methodology behind the solution). Can a timestamp be validated to being accurate to the time that the content was really submitted? Can data be stored in a form that it can be read, but not written to, in a proven way? In other words, can I save & store a user's submission in a way that proves that the data has not been altered, and that the timestamp is accurate? I can't think of any programming method that would make this possible, but I am not the most experienced programmer out there. Based on MidnightLightning's answer to the question I cited, this sort of thing is being done. Clarification: I'm looking for a method (hashing, encryption, etc) that would allow an average guy like me to achieve the desired effect through programming. I'm interested in this subject for the purpose of Defensive Publication. I'd like to learn a method that allows an every-day programmer to pick up his computer, write a program, pass information through it, and say: I created this text at this moment in time, and I can prove it. This means the information should be protected from the programmer who writes the code as well. Perhaps a 3rd party API would be required. I'm ok with that.

  Read the article

• Black screen on login, can get thru decrypt disk and access command line but no GUI

  - by t3lf3c

  Running 12.04 64 bit fresh alternative install, with disk crypto on a new Lenovo laptop Install didn't connect and install modules, even though I had the network cable plugged in and don't have any whacky proxy settings. I had to manually install ubunut-desktop and define sources after initial installation, so this seemed a bit weird (ISO matched MD5 sum though) I unplug the network cable, otherwise I get a black screen that I can do nothing with. So I turn laptop on, I have disk encryption, I type in the password at the Ubuntu decryption GUI then get "set up successfully" message "Waiting for network configuration ..." then "Waiting for up to 60 more seconds for network configuration" At this stage (a) If I wait for it then I get a black screen that I can do nothing with. (b) If I interrupt the process by pressing escape, then I break through to the command line. From the command line, I can go ahead and login, then plug my network cable in to do apt-get commands. As a precaution I do some house keeping which takes a few mins to run: sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get upgrade Running startx to get to the GUI gives: Fatal server errror: no screens found The .Xauthority file is being created in my home directory but it's empty. I review my order and note the system graphics: Intel HD Graphics (WWAN or mSATA capable) So it's weird that I can't get to the Gnome. It looks like drivers aren't working. Is there a way of getting Intel drivers from the command line? Or do you have any other suggestions on what to try next?

  Read the article

• How to access an encrypted INI file from C on an embedded system with little RAM

  - by Mawg

  I want to encrypt an INI file using a Delphi program on a Windows PC. Then I need to decrypt & access it in C on an embedded system with little RAM. I will do that once & fetch all info; I will not be consutinuously accessing the INI file whenever my program needs data from the file. Any advice as to which encryption to use? Nothing too heavyweight, just good enough for "Security through obscurity" and FOSS for both Delphi & C. And how can I decrypt, get all the info from the INI file - using as little RAM as possible, and then free any allocated RAM? I hope that someone can help. [Update] I am currently using an Atmel UC3, although I am not sure if that will be the final case. It has 512kB falsh & 128kB RAM. For an INI file, I am talking of max 8 sections, with a total of max 256 entries, each max 8 chars. I chose INI (but am not married to it), because i have had major problems in the past when the format of a data fiel changes, no matter whether binary, or text. For tex, I prefer the free format of INI (on PC), but suppose I could switch to line_1=data_1, line_2=data_2 and accept that if I add new fields in future software erleases they must come at the end, even if it is not pretty when read directly by humans. I suppose if I choose a fixed format text file then I never need get more than one line into RAM at a time ...

  Read the article

• Securely automount encrypted drive at user login

  - by Tom Brossman

  An encrypted /home directory gets mounted automatically for me when I log in. I have a second internal hard drive that I've formatted and encrypted with Disk Utility. I want it to be automatically mounted when I login, just like my encrypted /home directory is. How do I do this? There are several very similar questions here, but the answers don't apply to my situation. It might be best to close/merge my question here and edit the second one below, but I think it may have been abandoned (and therefore never to be marked as accepted). This solution isn't a secure method, it circumvents the encryption. This one requires editing fstab, which necessitates entering an additional password at boot. It's not automatic like mounting /home. This question is very similar, but does not apply to an encrypted drive. The solution won't work for my needs. Here is one but it's for NTFS drives, mine is ext4. I can re-format and re-encrypt the second drive if a solution requires this. I've got all the data backed up elsewhere.

  Read the article

• How to programmatically detect Cipher type and Encryption level from a wireless network device from

  - by amexn

  Now my team working in a network project using windows application c#. I didn't know how to programmatically detect Cipher type and Encryption level from a wireless network device from windows 2003 server. After searching i got WMI (Windows Management Instrumentation) for solving the problem.+ Please suggest example/reference for finding Cipher type and Encryption level from a wireless network device from windows 2003 server

  Read the article

• Ideas for multiplatform encrypted java mobile storage system

  - by Fernando Miguélez

  Objective I am currently designing the API for a multiplatform storage system that would offer same interface and capabilities accross following supported mobile Java Platforms: J2ME. Minimum configuration/profile CLDC 1.1/MIDP 2.0 with support for some necessary JSRs (JSR-75 for file storage). Android. No minimum platform version decided yet, but rather likely could be API level 7. Blackberry. It would use the same base source of J2ME but taking advantage of some advaced capabilities of the platform. No minimum configuration decided yet (maybe 4.6 because of 64 KB limitation for RMS on 4.5). Basically the API would sport three kind of stores: Files. These would allow standard directory/file manipulation (read/write through streams, create, mkdir, etc.). Preferences. It is a special store that handles properties accessed through keys (Similar to plain old java properties file but supporting some improvements such as different value data types such as SharedPreferences on Android platform) Local Message Queues. This store would offer basic message queue functionality. Considerations Inspired on JSR-75, all types of stores would be accessed in an uniform way by means of an URL following RFC 1738 conventions, but with custom defined prefixes (i.e. "file://" for files, "prefs://" for preferences or "queue://" for message queues). The address would refer to a virtual location that would be mapped to a physical storage object by each mobile platform implementation. Only files would allow hierarchical storage (folders) and access to external extorage memory cards (by means of a unit name, the same way as in JSR-75, but that would not change regardless of underlying platform). The other types would only support flat storage. The system should also support a secure version of all basic types. The user would indicate it by prefixing "s" to the URL (i.e. "sfile://" instead of "file://"). The API would only require one PIN (introduced only once) to access any kind of secure object types. Implementation issues For the implementation of both plaintext and encrypted stores, I would use the functionality available on the underlying platforms: Files. These are available on all platforms (J2ME only with JSR-75, but it is mandatory for our needs). The abstract File to actual File mapping is straight except for addressing issues. RMS. This type of store available on J2ME (and Blackberry) platforms is convenient for Preferences and maybe Message Queues (though depending on performance or size requirements these could be implemented by means of normal files). SharedPreferences. This type of storage, only available on Android, would match Preferences needs. SQLite databases. This could be used for message queues on Android (and maybe Blackberry). When it comes to encryption some requirements should be met: To ease the implementation it will be carried out on read/write operations basis on streams (for files), RMS Records, SharedPreferences key-value pairs, SQLite database columns. Every underlying storage object should use the same encryption key. Handling of encrypted stores should be the same as the unencrypted counterpart. The only difference (from the user point of view) accessing an encrypted store would be the addressing. The user PIN provides access to any secure storage object, but the change of it would not require to decrypt/re-encrypt all the encrypted data. Cryptographic capabilities of underlying platform should be used whenever it is possible, so we would use: J2ME: SATSA-CRYPTO if it is available (not mandatory) or lightweight BoncyCastle cryptographic framework for J2ME. Blackberry: RIM Cryptographic API or BouncyCastle Android: JCE with integraced cryptographic provider (BouncyCastle?) Doubts Having reached this point I was struck by some doubts about what solution would be more convenient, taking into account the limitation of the plataforms. These are some of my doubts: Encryption Algorithm for data. Would AES-128 be strong and fast enough? What alternatives for such scenario would you suggest? Encryption Mode. I have read about the weakness of ECB encryption versus CBC, but in this case the first would have the advantage of random access to blocks, which is interesting for seek functionality on files. What type of encryption mode would you choose instead? Is stream encryption suitable for this case? Key generation. There could be one key generated for each storage object (file, RMS RecordStore, etc.) or just use one for all the objects of the same type. The first seems "safer", though it would require some extra space on device. In your opinion what would the trade-offs of each? Key storage. For this case using a standard JKS (or PKCS#12) KeyStore file could be suited to store encryption keys, but I could also define a smaller structure (encryption-transformation / key data / checksum) that could be attached to each storage store (i.e. using addition files with the same name and special extension for plain files or embedded inside other types of objects such as RMS Record Stores). What approach would you prefer? And when it comes to using a standard KeyStore with multiple-key generation (given this is your preference), would it be better to use a record-store per storage object or just a global KeyStore keeping all keys (i.e. using the URL identifier of abstract storage object as alias)? Master key. The use of a master key seems obvious. This key should be protected by user PIN (introduced only once) and would allow access to the rest of encryption keys (they would be encrypted by means of this master key). Changing the PIN would only require to reencrypt this key and not all the encrypted data. Where would you keep it taking into account that if this got lost all data would be no further accesible? What further considerations should I take into account? Platform cryptography support. Do SATSA-CRYPTO-enabled J2ME phones really take advantage of some dedicated hardware acceleration (or other advantage I have not foreseen) and would this approach be prefered (whenever possible) over just BouncyCastle implementation? For the same reason is RIM Cryptographic API worth the license cost over BouncyCastle? Any comments, critics, further considerations or different approaches are welcome.

  Read the article

• standard encryption decryption across different platforms

  - by Raj

  hey guys i need to implement a standard encryption decryption logic across an entire project platform which has different clients implemented using different platforms as follows: 1) iphone app (objectiv c) 2) website (classic asp) 3) webservice (asp.net) the iphone app as well as the website need to send info to webservice using encrypted query strings the web service then decrypts this and processes the info further wanted to know the simplest way to achieve this. is there some free and ready to use binary available with an easy to use api to achieve this? encryption needs to be as secure as possible thnx in advance

  Read the article

• VIM: Encryption key.

  - by tr-sugumar

  I'm having one doubt about the VIM ENCRYPTION key. I having a text file, I encrypted that file using :X Now, where the encrypted key is stored. If I open a the file it asked Encryption key. How it compare my key with the original key?

  Read the article

• I started getting a weird message "Encrypting file system - Back up your file encryption key"

  - by user22559

  Hello I started getting a strange message when I start my computer. An icon appears in the system tray, and a popup tells me "Encrypting file system - Back up your file encryption key". I know what EFS is, but I don't use it. To my knowledge, I don't have any encrypted files on my partition. I have searched using Total Commander on all the partitions for files that have the "encrypted" attribute, but I found nothing. So I don't have any encrypted files. Does anyone know what I did to get this message?

  Read the article

• SSLCipherSuite - disable weak encryption, cbc cipher and md5 based algorithm

  - by John

  A developer recently ran a PCI Scan with TripWire against our LAMP server. They identified several issues and instructed the following to correct the issues: Problem: SSL Server Supports Weak Encryption for SSLv3, TLSv1, Solution: Add the following rule to httpd.conf SSLCipherSuite ALL:!aNULL:!eNULL:!LOW:!EXP:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM Problem: SSL Server Supports CBC Ciphers for SSLv3, TLSv1 Solution: Disable any cipher suites using CBC ciphers Problem: SSL Server Supports Weak MAC Algorithm for SSLv3, TLSv1 Solution: Disable any cipher suites using MD5 based MAC algorithms I tried searching google for a comprehensive tutorial on how to construct an SSLCipherSuite directive to meet my requirements, but I didn't find anything I could understand. I see examples of SSLCipherSuite directives, but I need an explanation on what each component of the directive does. So even in the directive SSLCipherSuite ALL:!aNULL:!eNULL:!LOW:!EXP:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM, I dont understand for example what the !LOW means. Can someone either a) tell me the SSLCipherSuite directive that will meet my needs or b) show me a resource that clearly explains each segment of a SSLCipherSuite is and how to construct one?

  Read the article

• I started getting a weird message "Encrypting file system - Back up your file encryption key"

  - by Ove

  I started getting a strange message when I start my computer. An icon appears in the system tray, and a popup tells me "Encrypting file system - Back up your file encryption key". I know what EFS is, but I don't use it. To my knowledge, I don't have any encrypted files on my partition. I have searched using Total Commander on all the partitions for files that have the "encrypted" attribute, but I found nothing. So I don't have any encrypted files. Does anyone know what I did to get this message?

  Read the article

• strategy /insights for avoiding document content loss due to encryption

  - by pbernatchez

  I'm about to encourage a group of people to begin using S-Mime and GPG for digital signatures and encryption. I foresee a nightmare of encrypted documents which can no longer be recovered because of lost keys. The thorniest issue is archiving. The natural way to preserve privacy in an archive is to archive the encrypted document. But that opens us up to the risk of a lost key when time comes to unarchive a document, or a forgotten password. After all it will be a long way in the future. This would be equivalent to having destroyed the document. First thought is archiving keys with documents, but that still leaves the forgotten pass phrase. Archiving the passphrase too would be tantamount to archiving in the clear. No privacy. What approaches do you use? What insights can you offer on the issue?

  Read the article

• Unable to use strong encryption

  - by user224299

  So I am exploring Apache to create a simple example: the default page and a directory "secure". I everyone to be able to access the server but, when one wants to access the "secure" directory, I the connection to use strong encryption. I am using apache2.4. However this is not working and I don't know why! I have done just like in the Apache tutorial: LoadModule ssl_module /usr/lib/apache2/modules/mod_ssl.so <VirtualHost *:443> SSLEngine on SSLCertificateFile /home/vitorpereira/Desktop/cert.cer SSLCertificateKeyFile /home/vitorpereira/Desktop/key.key </VirtualHost> SSLCipherSuite ALL:!ADH:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM:+LOW:+SSLv2:+EXP:+eNULL <Location /var/www/html/secure> SSLCipherSuite HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5 </Location> But this does not work :/ And, I can access the secure folder with http but when I write https, it says not found!

  Read the article

• Is this simple XOR encrypted communication absolutely secure?

  - by user3123061

  Say Alice have 4GB USB flash memory and Peter also have 4GB USB flash memory. They once meet and save on both of memories two files named alice_to_peter.key (2GB) and peter_to_alice.key (2GB) which is randomly generated bits. Then they never meet again and communicate electronicaly. Alice also maintains variable called alice_pointer and Peter maintains variable called peter_pointer which is both initially set to zero. Then when Alice needs to send message to Peter they do: encrypted_message_to_peter[n] = message_to_peter[n] XOR alice_to_peter.key[alice_pointer + n] Where n i n-th byte of message. Then alice_pointer is attached at begining of the encrypted message and (alice_pointer + encrypted message) is sent to Peter and then alice_pointer is incremented by length of message (and for maximum security can be used part of key erased) Peter receives encrypted_message, reads alice_pointer stored at beginning of message and do this: message_to_peter[n] = encrypted_message_to_peter[n] XOR alice_to_peter.key[alice_pointer + n] And for maximum security after reading of message also erases used part of key. - EDIT: In fact this step with this simple algorithm (without integrity check and authentication) decreases security, see Paulo Ebermann post below. When Peter needs to send message to Alice they do analogical steps with peter_to_alice.key and with peter_pointer. With this trivial schema they can send for next 50 years each day 2GB / (50 * 365) = cca 115kB of encrypted data in both directions. If they need more data to send, they simple use larger memory for keys for example with today 2TB harddiscs (1TB keys) is possible to exchange next 50years 60MB/day ! (thats practicaly lots of data for example with using compression its more than hour of high quality voice communication) It Seems to me there is no way for attacker to read encrypted message without keys even if they have infinitely fast computer. because even with infinitely fast computer with brute force they get ever possible message that can fit to length of message, but this is astronomical amount of messages and attacker dont know which of them is actual message. I am right? Is this communication schema really absolutely secure? And if its secure, has this communication method its own name? (I mean XOR encryption is well-known, but whats name of this concrete practical application with use large memories at both communication sides for keys? I am humbly expecting that this application has been invented someone before me :-) ) Note: If its absolutely secure then its amazing because with today low cost large memories it is practicaly much cheeper way of secure communication than expensive quantum cryptography and with equivalent security! EDIT: I think it will be more and more practical in future with lower a lower cost of memories. It can solve secure communication forever. Today you have no certainty if someone succesfuly atack to existing ciphers one year later and make its often expensive implementations unsecure. In many cases before comunication exist step where communicating sides meets personaly, thats time to generate large keys. I think its perfect for military communication for example for communication with submarines which can have installed harddrive with large keys and military central can have harddrive for each submarine they have. It can be also practical in everyday life for example for control your bank account because when you create your account you meet with bank etc.

  Read the article

• apache2 mysql authentication module and SHA1 encryption

  - by Luca Rossi

  I found myself in a setup on where I need to enable some authentication method using mysql. I already have an user scheme. That user scheme is working like a charm with MD5 password and CRYPT, but when I turn to SHA1sum it says: [Fri Oct 26 00:03:20 2012] [error] Unsupported encryption type: Sha1sum No useful debug informations on log files. This is my setup and some info: debian6 apache and ssl installed packages: root@sistemichiocciola:/etc/apache2/mods-available# dpkg --list | grep apache ii apache2 2.2.16-6+squeeze8 Apache HTTP Server metapackage ii apache2-mpm-prefork 2.2.16-6+squeeze8 Apache HTTP Server - traditional non-threaded model ii apache2-utils 2.2.16-6+squeeze8 utility programs for webservers ii apache2.2-bin 2.2.16-6+squeeze8 Apache HTTP Server common binary files ii apache2.2-common 2.2.16-6+squeeze8 Apache HTTP Server common files ii libapache2-mod-auth-mysql 4.3.9-13+b1 Apache 2 module for MySQL authentication ii libapache2-mod-php5 5.3.3-7+squeeze14 server-side, HTML-embedded scripting language (Apache 2 module) root@sistemichiocciola:/etc/apache2/sites-enabled# dpkg --list | grep ssl ii libssl-dev 0.9.8o-4squeeze13 SSL development libraries, header files and documentation ii libssl0.9.8 0.9.8o-4squeeze13 SSL shared libraries ii openssl 0.9.8o-4squeeze13 Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary and related cryptographic tools ii openssl-blacklist 0.5-2 list of blacklisted OpenSSL RSA keys ii ssl-cert 1.0.28 simple debconf wrapper for OpenSSL my vhost setup: AuthMySQL On Auth_MySQL_Host localhost Auth_MySQL_User XXX Auth_MySQL_Password YYY Auth_MySQL_DB users AuthName "Sistemi Chiocciola Sezione Informatica" AuthType Basic # require valid-user require group informatica Auth_MySQL_Encryption_Types Crypt Sha1sum AuthBasicAuthoritative Off AuthUserFile /dev/null Auth_MySQL_Password_Table users Auth_MYSQL_username_field email Auth_MYSQL_password_field password AuthMySQL_Empty_Passwords Off AuthMySQL_Group_Table http_groups Auth_MySQL_Group_Field user_group Have I missed a package/configuration or something?

  Read the article

• Windows 7 remote desktop encryption error every few minutes

  - by rfrankel

  Because of an error in data encryption, this session will now end. This is the error I've been getting more and more frequently over the past few days, to the point that I can't ignore it because it's happening consistently within 5 minutes of connecting - sometimes within a few seconds. Both the remote and local machines are Windows 7 Pro x64. The remote machine is behind a Linksys RV082, and I'm using UPnP to forward a remote port to the correct local port. This setup had been working fine for several months, and I can't think of any recent relevant changes that might have been made. Things I've already tried: Disabling unnecessary components of the network connection on the remote machine, until only IPv4 and Client for Microsoft Networks remain. Disabling TCP large send offload on both the remote and local machines. Confirming that the remote machine is not mentioned anywhere in any DMZ settings on the Linksys router. Confirming that there are no x509-related registry keys screwing things up (this is the suggested fix for a slightly different error anyway). These are the only solutions I've been able to find after about an hour of searching, and most of them apply to XP or Server 2003 in any case. If anyone could suggest something else, it would be much appreciated.

  Read the article

• using php to create a joomla user password?

  - by SoulieBaby

  Hi all, I'm trying to create a custom registration component for Joomla, and I was wondering if anyone knew how to create the correct password encryption for joomla? Joomla passwords look like this : fbae378704687625a410223a61c66eb1:VM6DwmVWHTwpquDq51ZXjWWADCIc93MR Which I believe are md5 (or something) and one way encryption? Am just looking for a php code of sorts to create that same encryption. Cheers

  Read the article

• Password Cracking Windows Accounts

  - by Kevin

  At work we have laptops with encrypted harddrives. Most developers here (on occasion I have been guilty of it too) leave their laptops in hibernate mode when they take them home at night. Obviously, Windows (i.e. there is a program running in the background which does it for windows) must have a method to unencrypt the data on the drive, or it wouldn't be able to access it. That being said, I always thought that leaving a windows machine on in hibernate mode in a non-secure place (not at work on a lock) is a security threat, because someone could take the machine, leave it running, hack the windows accounts and use it to encrypt the data and steal the information. When I got to thinking about how I would go about breaking into the windows system without restarting it, I couldn't figure out if it was possible. I know it is possible to write a program to crack windows passwords once you have access to the appropriate file(s). But is it possible to execute a program from a locked Windows system that would do this? I don't know of a way to do it, but I am not a Windows expert. If so, is there a way to prevent it? I don't want to expose security vulnerabilities about how to do it, so I would ask that someone wouldn't post the necessary steps in details, but if someone could say something like "Yes, it's possible the USB drive allows arbitrary execution," that would be great! EDIT: The idea being with the encryption is that you can't reboot the system, because once you do, the disk encryption on the system requires a login before being able to start windows. With the machine being in hibernate, the system owner has already bypassed the encryption for the attacker, leaving windows as the only line of defense to protect the data.

  Read the article

• HTTPS Proxy which answers CONNECT with own certificate

  - by user1109542

  I'm configuring a DMZ which has the following Scheme: Internet - Server A - Security Appliance - Server B - Intranet In this DMZ I need a Proxy server for http(s) connections from the Intranet to Internet. The Problem is, that all Traffic should be scanned by the Security Appliance. For this I have to terminate the SSL Connection at Server B, proxy it as plain http to Server A through the Security Appliance and then further as https into the Internet. An encryption is then persistent between the Client and Server B and the Target Server and Server A. The communication between Server A and Server B is unencrypted. I know about the security risks and that the client will see some warning about the unknown CA of Server B's certificate. As Software I want to use Apache Web Servers on Server A and Server B. As first step I tried to configure Server B that it serves as endpoint for the SSL Encryption. So it has to establish the encryption with the client (answering HTTP CONNECT). Listen 8443 <VirtualHost *:8443> ProxyRequests On ProxyPreserveHost On AllowCONNECT 443 # SSL ErrorLog logs/ssl_error_log TransferLog logs/ssl_access_log LogLevel debug SSLProxyEngine on SSLProxyMachineCertificateFile /etc/pki/tls/certs/localhost_private_public.crt <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 192.168.0.0/22 </Proxy> </VirtualHost> With this Proxy only the CONNECT request is passed through and an encrypted Connection between the client and the target is established. Unfortunately there is no possibility to configure mod_proxy_connect to decrypt the SSL connection. Is there any possibility to accomplish that kind of proxying with Apache?

  Read the article

• Isn't a hidden volume used when encrypting a drive with TrueCrypt detectable?

  - by neurolysis

  I don't purport to be an expert on encryption (or even TrueCrypt specifically), but I have used TrueCrypt for a number of years and have found it to be nothing short of invaluable for securing data. As relatively well known free, open-source software, I would have thought that TrueCrypt would not have fundamental flaws in the way it operates, but unless I'm reading it wrong, it has one in the area of hidden volume encryption. There is some documentation regarding encryption with a hidden volume here. The statement that concerns me is this (emphasis mine): TrueCrypt first attempts to decrypt the standard volume header using the entered password. If it fails, it loads the area of the volume where a hidden volume header can be stored (i.e. bytes 65536–131071, which contain solely random data when there is no hidden volume within the volume) to RAM and attempts to decrypt it using the entered password. Note that hidden volume headers cannot be identified, as they appear to consist entirely of random data. Whilst the hidden headers supposedly "cannot be identified", is it not possible to, on encountering an encrypted volume encrypted using TrueCrypt, determine at which offset the header was successfully decrypted, and from that determine if you have decrypted the header for a standard volume or a hidden volume? That seems like a fundamental flaw in the header decryption implementation, if I'm reading this right -- or am I reading it wrong?

  Read the article

• Triple-DES encryption in android.

  - by Raj

  Hi, i am new to android and planning to use Triple-DES encryption to encrypt data and store it into the DataBase in my android application. the thing is if i try to use DES or Triple DES its giving Hexadecimal encrypted string. But i need some encrypted value which looks like my previous value. i have 3 kinds of variables to encrypt. those are String,numeric and Date type variables. My requirement is if i encrypt a date type, i need to get the cipher text looks like date. So can any one suggest with an example to impliment and encryption technique.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >