That's a good point, stop worrying about the physical side of things because it is a bit pointless. Perhaps just recommend that the user install Truecrypt and refer them to the Truecrypt site, give them a strong warning that if their drive is not encrypted, Freenet can't actually protect them from physical attacks.
On Jul 31, 2010, at 9:52 AM, xor wrote: > On Friday 30 July 2010 04:29:54 pm Matthew Toseland wrote: >> >> 1. Offer to turn on encrypted swap in the installer. Keep encrypting >> everything. Warn users about saving files out, and media files, and work >> towards playing media files in an embedded (e.g. java) player that doesn't >> use plaintext temp files. > > Offering to reconfigure swap to be encrypted is out of scope. And not > possible > on Windows > >> 2. Give up on encrypting anything on disk, and >> offer to install TrueCrypt if it isn't already installed. > > Offering TrueCrypt is out of scope > > I see a third option: > > 3. Realize that most users have a real LOAD of stuff on their hard disks > which > could get them screwed. Get rid of physical security. Encrypting the Freenet > stuff does not help because they will use browsers which cache dangerous > stuff > and do downloads of dangerous stuff etc. The really paranoid ones will use > TrueCrypt anyway. And encryption makes stuff slow. > > I mean it IS nice that we have a physical security level but I wouldn't have > offered that feature from the beginning on. > > If you want to be safe when your computer gets seized you absolutely have to > do full disk encryption, something will ALWAYS leak out otherwise. > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
