I sent this but it never went through, so here I send to you again:)
The main circumstance for a double key would be for a search and seizure scenario. Nobody would know there is a second key needed to open the persistent drive. And one would feel safe knowing there is a large password protecting their persistent drive.
Another bigger issue that should be considered is: Implementing a failsafe mechanism that wipes the persistent drive if a number of failed attempts are made.
I really want that type of protection. Say after 5 failed attempts it locks a user for an hour and after 8 failed attempts it wipes the drive totally.
Thanks again for reading!!! Anthony MadX Unless I missed something, it would make the persistent volume just as secure as whatever protects the content of that other USB stick. Presumably, that other USB stick would have a passphrase that the user needs to enter manually. And one would need to keep that other USB stick physically close enough to their Tails stick, so they can use their Tails persistent volume. So I don't quite get what is the actual security advantage this would bring. Can you please clarify how, and under what circumstances, it would make some attacker's job harder? Thanks for reading! Thanks for sharing! _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.