From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 14 19:43:56 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2177A8F9; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 19:43:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from platinum.linux.pl (platinum.edu.pl [81.161.192.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DF9A2; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 19:43:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by platinum.linux.pl (Postfix, from userid 87) id DF3E545219A; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:43:46 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on platinum.linux.pl X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.4.0 Received: from [10.255.0.2] (unknown [83.151.38.73]) by platinum.linux.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7EFF9452198; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:43:46 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54B6C6B7.4070407@platinum.linux.pl> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:42:47 +0100 From: Adam Nowacki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 'freebsd-geom' Subject: Re: ChaCha8/12/20 and GEOM ELI tests References: <54b33bfa.e31b980a.3e5d.ffffc823@mx.google.com> <54B4AE55.9090205@platinum.linux.pl> <54b5d299.4914980a.61cd.43a6@mx.google.com> <20150114041708.GA3189@reks> <54b601ec.0515980a.0c9c.47e1@mx.google.com> <20150114082019.GA3669@reks> <54b6ae4c.0905990a.6c9c.642e@mx.google.com> <54b6b91b.2aa3700a.3a6c.47b5@mx.google.com> In-Reply-To: <54b6b91b.2aa3700a.3a6c.47b5@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 19:43:56 -0000 On 2015-01-14 19:44, rozhuk.im@gmail.com wrote: >> Excuse me, but if you think your physical medium is either 100% >> inaccessible to an adversary, or simply not worth a real attack, and >> the speed is the concern, then why do you want to use any encryption at >> all? > > 100% is not available yet introduced GELI keys / mounted drive. > AES-XTS is good but too slow. FreeBSD supports AES-NI - hardware accelerated AES available in many Intel and AMD processors. I'm seeing speeds of 1GB/s on i5 2500K. > ChaCha is already enough to cryptography was not a bottleneck. > > The case when the disks - local (SATA/SAS/IDE/USB), keys entered / disk is mounted and the attacker has access I do not see because AES-XTS does not help. A few scenarios that will break ChaCha encryption: - remapped bad sectors on spinning disks, - multiple copies of sectors on SSD due to wear leveling, - RAID with one of the drives dropping out due to bad cabling, bad sectors or other issues, - disk imaged at multiple points in time (for example powered-off laptop left unattended).