On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 13:00, Salatiel Filho<salatiel.filho@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:24, Heinz Diehl<htd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 06.08.2009, Henrik Theiling wrote: >> >>> Fascinating. I thought Serpent was universally the slowest of the >>> three big algorithms (AES/Rijndael, Twofish, Serpent) that was used if >>> you wanted highest security margins. Your speed test results come >>> quite unexpected for me... >> >> The question is: how has this been measured, and is it faster on both read >> and write operations? E.g. a simple "hdparm -tT /dev/xxx" is not sufficient. >> > I just encrypted the partition , put some random data there [i do not > care about write speed in this particular storage, it is just a NAS > (ARM 266 + 128RAM running debian lenny)], then drop_caches , export > the data using nfs, mount from another machine and copy that file. > Repeated the proccess using aes and using serpent. Serpent is much faster ... > I really don't know which cipher is/shouldbe faster, but serpent gives > me a great speed ... > >> How about a bonnie++ run, e.g. something like >> "bonnie++ -u htd:users -d /mnt/test -s 16016m -m liesel -n 16:100000:16:6" i will try to do this tonight. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dm-crypt mailing list >> dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx >> http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt >> > > > > -- > []'s > Salatiel > > "O maior prazer do inteligente é bancar o idiota > diante de um idiota que banca o inteligente". > -- []'s Salatiel "O maior prazer do inteligente é bancar o idiota diante de um idiota que banca o inteligente". _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
