Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #1301 > unrolled thread

Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-06 15:05 +0000
    Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Randy Westlund <Vorzakir@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-06 22:49 +0000
      Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-07 09:09 +0000
      Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-07 10:46 +0000
    Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS 2phar <none@example.com> - 2014-03-06 18:12 -0500
    Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com> - 2014-03-07 07:23 +0000
      Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-07 07:49 +0000
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-07 10:21 +0000
          Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-03-07 11:49 +0000
            Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-07 12:21 +0000
              Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-03-07 19:43 -0400
          Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS "wjwlsn" <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-03-07 15:02 -0600
      Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2014-03-07 19:24 +0000
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-07 19:48 +0000
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2014-03-07 21:52 +0000
          Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-08 11:55 +0000
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-03-07 22:17 +0000
          Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware, not their OS Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2014-03-08 20:52 +0000
    Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS "jonh" <jon@nada-sub.co.uk> - 2014-03-07 01:55 -0600
    Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-03-07 19:06 -0600
      Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS "q.kontinuum" <achsis_of_elvis@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-17 07:53 +0100
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-17 14:22 +0000
        Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware  not their OS "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-03-18 14:46 -0600

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#1703 — Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware not their OS

On 2014-03-08, tdk <forum.tdk@squte.com> wrote:
> Can you do whole disk encryption on these? 
> I have Ubuntu on my laptop and this is the killer feature. 
> It's easy to set up and not only protects your data if your laptop
> is stolen but means it's less valuable to the thief who has to
> install another OS (and that's only if you haven't locked down the
> bios) 

I think, for most BIOS-lock-downs it is still possible to reset it,
either by soma backdoor password or at least by opening the device.

> I've tried to install Ubuntu with disk encryption on a USB flash
> drive before but found it unusably slow. 

Did you try to partition the disk? I'd usually go for an encryptes
home folder, depending on use case maybe /var, but /usr,/bin,/lib
should always remain unencrypted. Not sure how much overhead this
saves, but I'd imagine it improves the boot-time and
application-startup time onsiderably.

-- 
Trolling is a art!

My public-key is available on http://tinyurl.com/ps9r99y

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1723 — Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware not their OS

In message <coiiva-utf.ln1@7398004cd8ad880124144d3c685567d7.anonymous> 
  q.kontinuum <achsis_of_elvis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 2014-03-08, tdk <forum.tdk@squte.com> wrote:
>> Can you do whole disk encryption on these? 
>> I have Ubuntu on my laptop and this is the killer feature. 
>> It's easy to set up and not only protects your data if your laptop
>> is stolen but means it's less valuable to the thief who has to
>> install another OS (and that's only if you haven't locked down the
>> bios) 

> I think, for most BIOS-lock-downs it is still possible to reset it,
> either by soma backdoor password or at least by opening the device.

>> I've tried to install Ubuntu with disk encryption on a USB flash
>> drive before but found it unusably slow. 

> Did you try to partition the disk? I'd usually go for an encryptes
> home folder, depending on use case maybe /var, but /usr,/bin,/lib
> should always remain unencrypted. Not sure how much overhead this
> saves, but I'd imagine it improves the boot-time and
> application-startup time onsiderably.

If this is true, the Ubuntu is ding something very stupid with
encrypting the disk.

Full disk encryption should be almost completely undetectable in terms
of performance. Certainly well under a 5% hit.

-- 
Secret to a happy relationship: when you're wrong, admit it. When you're
right, shut up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1775 — Re: Buying Chromebooks for their hardware not their OS

> I think, for most BIOS-lock-downs it is still possible to reset it, either by soma 
> backdoor password or at least by opening the device. 

Yes, it's just another disincentive that lowers the value of the laptop for a thief. 

> Did you try to partition the disk? I'd usually go for an encryptes home folder, 
> depending on use case maybe /var, but /usr,/bin,/lib should always remain unencrypted. 
> Not sure how much overhead this saves, but I'd imagine it improves the boot-time 
> and application-startup time onsiderably. 

I didn't think of this. The main thing I want to protect is any passwords in /etc. 
but you�re right, there�s no reason to encrypt /usr, /lib etc. 
USB discs are also slower than internal SSDs. I haven't noticed any slow down just 
encrypting my home directory, so I'll probably try partitioning next. 




-- 
regards
~tdk
View this thread at http://squte.com/node/5287#comment-18873

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web