most recent sources on the web seem to say that luks is the way to go. but is
this true if you don't need multiple keys or oses?
could these arguments against luks apply?
o header corruption: many cases of data corruption, including my own,
seem to result in luksOpen not working. in certain cases without
luks, perhaps you could open the partition, mount it, and fsck.
or is this unlikely?
o another layer: perhaps some cases of header corruption are due to
luks code. or is this unlikely?
o security: without the header, an attacker has less information. or
is this not of much use?
does everybody here use luks?
my main concern is data corruption at this point.
thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
dm-crypt mailing list - http://www.saout.de/misc/dm-crypt/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dm-crypt-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: dm-crypt-help@xxxxxxxx
