Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'encrypt'.
Found 3 results
On this forum, someone(RomanZ?) recomemded not to use encrypted secret keys (stars with "D" instead of "A") as they require more work (checksum) and hence more load on ARMs. I just got an idea that if substitution cipher is used instead of AES, is there any way of not having to do more checksums (assuming sum of all bytes is the checksum, it wont change even after encryption). And the encryption would be fast as well and it is compressible as well. And if another encryption is done after compression, it is more hard to break I guess. I am not an expret, just some thoughts. Any possibility?
Just wanted to make sure this works the way I think it will, and it is the best way to go about doing this. I want to sync a folder from someones computer to a remote server. I know sync itself sends the data securely, but I want to make sure the folders on both ends are secure as well. If I encrypt the folders on both the users computer and the server (say with truecrypt) will I run into on problems sycing? And is this a very secure way of storing/sending files? Would it cause any problems if the files were coming from a mac or PC to a linux or freeBSD server? THANKS!
Hi! I am using BitTorrent Sync 1.1.42 on my Synology NAS to sync data to another computer. The data on the NAS is stored in an encrypted folder, but after syncing the files to the target computer they are unencrypted. In contrast, if I use rsync to sync to another destination, the files remain encrypted. Anyone experiencing the same problem? Or am I doing something wrong? Michael