Good encryption software for Vista?

I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but it
doesn't work under Vista.

I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption facility
and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if I am logged in
(using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password to decrypt the data).

Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have to
enter a password to access them?

Cheers.

Bobby

"Bobby" <bobby@europe.com> wrote in message
news:ej4ZJMRLHHA.3424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but it
>doesn't work under Vista.
>
> I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption facility
> and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if I am logged
> in (using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password to decrypt the
> data).
>
> Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have to
> enter a password to access them?


I use truecrypt from http://www.truecrypt.org/.
--
Tom Porterfield

"Bobby" <bobby@europe.com> wrote in message
news:ej4ZJMRLHHA.3424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but
>it doesn't work under Vista.
>
> I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption
> facility and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if
> I am logged in (using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password
> to decrypt the data).
>
> Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have
> to enter a password to access them?

Steganography is used to *hide* data. That's not the same as protecting
it.

Truecrypt would work to *protect* your data but not to hide it.

Well what's your opinion of the data encryption built into Vista?.


"Vanguard" <no@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:e9nt9IYLHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "Bobby" <bobby@europe.com> wrote in message
> news:ej4ZJMRLHHA.3424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but it
>>doesn't work under Vista.
>>
>> I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption facility
>> and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if I am logged
>> in (using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password to decrypt the
>> data).
>>
>> Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have to
>> enter a password to access them?
>
> Steganography is used to *hide* data. That's not the same as protecting
> it.
>
> Truecrypt would work to *protect* your data but not to hide it.

Truecrypt, and it has a plausible deniability feature, read the features
page. Best part
it's open source..

SD

"Bobby" <bobby@europe.com> wrote in message
news:ej4ZJMRLHHA.3424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but it
>doesn't work under Vista.
>
> I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption facility
> and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if I am logged
> in (using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password to decrypt the
> data).
>
> Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have to
> enter a password to access them?
>
> Cheers.
>
> Bobby

I don't believe for a minute that Windows Vista encryption is not breakable
by Microsoft or the NSA. That's just opinion; I don't have any evidence to
back it up.

Even if it were otherwise secure, managing it is risky. You can export your
security keys so that you an recover your files if you lose your MS identity
but that is an administrative and management burden that most users won't
perform. Just changing your password incorrectly will cause you to
completely lose access to your files without having properly exported your
keys. And anyone who can get their hands on those keys can still get your
data.

I suggest using an public key system like PGP, assuming they will have a
Vista version. This allows you to safely backup both your public and
private keys as well as your encrypted data and still be able to recover
them on any computer later.

Dale


"Mr. Vista" <Mr. Vista@lhere.com> wrote in message
news:e9WIpnZLHHA.4712@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Well what's your opinion of the data encryption built into Vista?.
>
>
> "Vanguard" <no@mail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:e9nt9IYLHHA.1248@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> "Bobby" <bobby@europe.com> wrote in message
>> news:ej4ZJMRLHHA.3424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>I used Steganos Security Suite to protect sensitive data under XP but it
>>>doesn't work under Vista.
>>>
>>> I've tried encrypting the data using Vista's built-in encryption
>>> facility and this is fine - but the files are accessible to anyone if I
>>> am logged in (using Steganos I had to enter an encryption password to
>>> decrypt the data).
>>>
>>> Is there a way to encrypt (or otherwise protect) files so that I have to
>>> enter a password to access them?
>>
>> Steganography is used to *hide* data. That's not the same as protecting
>> it.
>>
>> Truecrypt would work to *protect* your data but not to hide it.
>
>

I agree that PGP is probably the best consumer level cryptographic
software, but it is not without its problems. There has been past
controversy as to whether or not it includes a "back door", as is the
case with many programs.
Also, all the software have problems resulting from the dilemma of
having to decrypt data before each usage. We found this to be a major
headache with the processing of encrypted SQL Server files.

Before PGP was purchased by Network Associates, I had complete faith in PGP.
Network Associates added the admin key to PGP allowing encrypted data to be
recovered in corporate situations and I began having serious doubts. I
stuck with PGP 5.0 because i just wasn't confident that PGP hadn't been
compromised.

I spoke with Phil Zimmermann personally about backdoors and whether the
second key represented a threat to PGP. He assured me that he has had full
technical architectural control over PGP from its inception up to the point
when I spoke with him shortly after PGP 8.0 was released and that there were
no back doors. If you don't install the 2nd key, there is no key other than
your own key in your encrypted files.

As an MCDBA, I can tell you I would never suggest encrypting SQL Server data
files. SQL Server just requires too much disk access. Instead,
encrypt/decrypt the data in the files.

Dale


"Robert Robinson" <robbiex@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:OgF4l$eLHHA.448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>I agree that PGP is probably the best consumer level cryptographic
>software, but it is not without its problems. There has been past
>controversy as to whether or not it includes a "back door", as is the case
>with many programs.
> Also, all the software have problems resulting from the dilemma of having
> to decrypt data before each usage. We found this to be a major headache
> with the processing of encrypted SQL Server files.

Hi Dale,

Thank you for your comments. I do remember the issue with Network
Associates and Phil's published response.
I don't have much faith in consumer cryptography in the USA in part due
to the government's repeated insistence on being able to easily decrypt
data. As far as I know, there isn't, as yet, a law that enforces such
access. It is, however, probably pretty easy for a government agency to
convince a vendor that it "is in the national interest" to provide a
back door.
I agree that protecting SQL Server data is extremely difficult. There is
a considerable amount of "handshaking" that not only makes repeated
encryption and decryption impractical, but also greatly slows data
transmissions as is evident when using non hard wired communications.

Robbie


Dale wrote:
> Before PGP was purchased by Network Associates, I had complete faith in
> PGP. Network Associates added the admin key to PGP allowing encrypted
> data to be recovered in corporate situations and I began having serious
> doubts. I stuck with PGP 5.0 because i just wasn't confident that PGP
> hadn't been compromised.
>
> I spoke with Phil Zimmermann personally about backdoors and whether the
> second key represented a threat to PGP. He assured me that he has had
> full technical architectural control over PGP from its inception up to
> the point when I spoke with him shortly after PGP 8.0 was released and
> that there were no back doors. If you don't install the 2nd key, there
> is no key other than your own key in your encrypted files.
>
> As an MCDBA, I can tell you I would never suggest encrypting SQL Server
> data files. SQL Server just requires too much disk access. Instead,
> encrypt/decrypt the data in the files.
>
> Dale
>
>
> "Robert Robinson" <robbiex@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:OgF4l$eLHHA.448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> I agree that PGP is probably the best consumer level cryptographic
>> software, but it is not without its problems. There has been past
>> controversy as to whether or not it includes a "back door", as is the
>> case with many programs.
>> Also, all the software have problems resulting from the dilemma of
>> having to decrypt data before each usage. We found this to be a major
>> headache with the processing of encrypted SQL Server files.
>

I was interested to see Tom Porterfield is using Truecypt on a vista os system. According to The Truecrypt web site they say not to use the current version and that a 'Vista' compatible version is on the way. Do you think that perhaps they are just playing safe and testing the current version in a Vista environment?. I would likr to here from anyone using Truecrypt on a vista os system.
Colin Evans

EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
http://www.eggheadcafe.com