Vista's BitLocker to use 1,024 bit encryption!

Bitlocker IS NOT IS NOT IS

Bitlocker IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT hardware based, idiot.

In reply to:

Doug Schweitzer wrote:
First off, Bitlocker is hardware based and provides full volume encryption. File Vault software based and only encrypts home directory. Of course they are different. I was merely trying to inject a little humor by saying that Apple has to catch up. That said, I still think BitLocker is a much better option than what Apple has to offer and I'm an Apple fan.

It's all irrelevant as the

It's all irrelevant as the weakest link is still that it uses a "PIN" or password for access. Even if you're using TPM you can access using a password in the recovery mode.

Until such time as we stop relying on people picking keys it's all a waste of time.

First off, Bitlocker is

First off, Bitlocker is hardware based and provides full volume encryption. File Vault software based and only encrypts home directory. Of course they are different. I was merely trying to inject a little humor by saying that Apple has to catch up. That said, I still think BitLocker is a much better option than what Apple has to offer and I'm an Apple fan.

Like I said, passwords are

Like I said, passwords are the weak link !

Actually I've been using

Actually I've been using 4096-bit for years now and yes that is significant overkill even for AES. The problem here is that you don't know when/if one of the encryption algorithms may be broken. True it helps to use open source so at least you can check for backdoors (which MS swears up and down will not happen or BitLocker will be withdrawn) and the bigger key the better. Better yet, encrypted containers within an encrypted container using two different algorithms. Just my random thoughts.

BTW, from my experience in systems (physical, network, computer) security, I seriously doubt BitLocker would have helped much. If this is the typical (l)user, the password to the system is somewhere around or dead easy to crack (l0phtcrack anyone?). In any case, I don't expect Vista to be deployed at the VA anytime soon. I'd expect at least two years after release as an absolute minimum, probably longer. I worked at a VA :-(.

Are you aware that the

Are you aware that the 128-bit key is for a symmetric encryption algorithm? Are you aware that the 1024-bit key is for an asymmetric encryption algorithm? Do you know the difference?

Why not kick it up a notch

Why not kick it up a notch and download Protexx's personal vpn software and encrypt all outgoing and incoming data to 2048 bit. I have been using it for 6 months and I am all but invisible when I'm in the tunnel. I am sure that FBI and NSA are aware of 2048 because 128 is sooooooooooo easy to crack. It's a shame because that's all anybody uses.

The problem is that

The problem is that BitLocker is not put to use automatically. There are very good open-source file encryption packages available today, so one does not need either Microsoft or Apple for this. Some open-source encryption packages ar so well done that even the FBI can't crack it. I am user BitLocker has a backdoor, and if not, the feds will make Microsoft put one in there. The VA incident may have happened in the same way with Vista installed on the laptop. Weak passwords and no encryption - then it does not matter which OS is used.