Slashdot Mirror
Encrypted Fileserver with Bittorrent Web Interface
mistermark writes "I built a fully encrypted (samba) fileserver with a web interface for managing torrent downloads on it. All I used is OpenBSD 3.6 and its package collection, except for the TorrentFlux-interface (which you need to install separately). Anyway, it can be built using binary packages only. I included a rough HOWTO on how to make one of these yourself."
Simple: You have random users which make backups to your machine but don't want anybody else to be able to read these backups.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
If the cops bust you, and you have an encrypted hard drive and you don't hand over the password, you will be charged with obstruction of justice. The maximum sentence of obstruction of justice is the same as the crime you are trying to avoid. So it really doesn't help you avoid anything.
i d=138
http://www.ohiobar.org/pub/lycu/index.asp?article
Be very, very careful when using the Windows XP built-in file encryption, called EFS (Encryping File System).
EFS is very poorly documented. The encryption is tied to your user password in a way that is apparently not documented. EFS depends on being part of a Windows 2003 Server domain in a way that is not clearly documented; if you are using Windows XP on a stand alone computer, there are situations in which you will lose your files forever.
Microsoft technical support agrees with what I just said, and provides no help or fixes.
The official Microsoft forums contain the complaints of many people who have lost their files due to problems with EFS. One man said he lost 11 years of research.
People complain about Microsoft every day on Slashdot, but I've never seen a discussion by anyone who seemed to realize how bad Microsoft truly is.
You said, "This is another example of mod-by-agreement. Anyway, EFS is documented perfectly well."
Correction: This is another example of someone on Slashdot acting sure when he knows nothing about the issue, and didn't even read the document at his first link in his Google Search: Microsoft Windows XP - Data Recovery and Data Recovery Agents, which says:
"The default design for the EFS recovery policy is different in Windows XP Professional than it was in Windows 2000 Professional. Stand-alone computers [using Windows XP] do not have a default DRA, but Microsoft strongly recommends that all environments have at least one designated DRA.
"In a Windows 2000 environment, if an administrator attempts to configure an EFS recovery policy with no recovery agent certificates, EFS is automatically disabled. In a Windows XP Professional environment, the same action enables users to encrypt files without a DRA. In a mixed environment an empty EFS recovery policy turns off EFS on Windows 2000 computers, but only eliminates the requirement for a DRA on Windows XP Professional computers."
This information means that you can lose your files in Windows XP in a way that you could not lose them in Windows 2000. Microsoft made this change, but provided no on-screen warning.
The Microsoft document quoted above says, "Stand-alone computers do not have a default DRA,..."
It should say, Stand-alone computers CANNOT have a DRA that allows decryption of files from a different computer with the same user name and password.
As I mentioned, this was verified by Microsoft Tecnhical Support representatives, as was the information in my parent post.
You said above, "I believe the process can be started with a simple cipher