Comments on: Bitlocker Versus True Crypt Performance

By: BitLocker对性能的影响 « 写一点

BitLocker对性能的影响 « 写一点 — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:41:26 +0000

[...] 首先，在网上进行了一下搜索，找到了一篇文章，其中给出的数据比较触目惊心，开启BitLocker，并使用不同加密算法时，对性能的影响在30%左右。下列两个图片来自原文网页。 [...]

By: saucer

saucer — Tue, 10 May 2011 04:02:44 +0000

I use Truecrypt for my servers. I trust em with my company ;-)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 02:01:45 +0000

I would use TrueCrypt for really, really sensitive stuff and BitLocker for speedy and external drives you might take with you to separate backups of something.

By: Fredda

Fredda — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 23:30:28 +0000

Who trust MS and the bitlocker function ?

Has it been done an code review for the bitlocker function
by an organisation OUTSIDE USA ?

How do I as a customer know that there is no backdoors ?

FBI, RIAA ?

By: Martin

Martin — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 07:44:41 +0000

Look at the url.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:50:54 +0000

You guys need to put dates on your articles. When was this from?

By: PT

PT — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 02:42:00 +0000

Sure, OSS, with source code available for all the hackers/crackers in the world take a look…. so, if you are so confident with access to source code, have you opened it, checked every line to be sure it’s really secure? Can you guarantee that there’s no bugs, or backdoors or whatever in the (binary, pre-compiled) OSS you have downloaded from the internet…. c’mon! At least, M$ binary code (proprietary) comes from the same website, and you should disassemble it before a sucessful hack.

By: jlm

jlm — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 15:26:02 +0000

I have been using TrueCrypt for a few months. When my Win7 system HD died I was able to connect and access my two other encrypted data drives on a Linux laptop with no problems. While reinstalling Win7 I was tempted to start using bitlocker, but the portability is hard to beat. Besides, M$ has already been pushed for a back-door, altho they supposedly have resisted so far. At least the TrueCrypt code is available for public scrutiny, even if the license isnt the best for “open-source”

By: No Excuses: Encrypting your Hard Drive « Healthcare as a Startup

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:28:16 +0000

[...] which works on any Windows OS version (e.g. Windows XP, Vista Home, etc.). Cons: not quite as fast as [...]

By: Erik S

Erik S — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:02:56 +0000

This is an easy choice. Truecrypt!

There is not a chance I would go with the bitlocker solution. It’s all about trust:

Who do you trust more?

Microsoft/bitlocker with the closed opaque proprietary code

Opensource Truecrypt

For me this is a no-brainer.

I’ve been using PGP Desktop WDE quite a number of years (as there was no other better alternative), but as soon as Truecrypt offered whole disk encryption, I switched to Truecrypt.

By: Piskvor

Piskvor — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:59:38 +0000

Bitlocker is faster, but TC is cross-platform – it works on other systems besides 7: XP, Vista, even Linux and Mac. Not a very likely possibility with BitLocker.

By: Bitlocker Versus True Crypt Performance – Ghacks Technology News | The Bargain Netbook

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:37:56 +0000

[...] Post By Google News Click Here For The Entire Article Netbook Deals- Share and [...]

By: nero

nero — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:13:36 +0000

Considering MS builds backdoors into their OS for national security and law enforcement purposes which encryption would you really prefer to have?

By: Bitlocker Versus True Crypt Performance - Garibet.com

Bitlocker Versus True Crypt Performance - Garibet.com — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:55:04 +0000

[...] from: Bitlocker Versus True Crypt Performance internet marketing AKPC_IDS += [...]