I’m currently running Hardy 8.04 LTS on a system using RAID 1 for / /home and swap. A while ago I installed Truecrypt and have used that to encrypt my most sensitive data. I have two 500 MB Truecrypt volumes, one serving as a backup of the other. This has worked fine for the limited data that it’s had to handle.
Recently, I copied loads of data off my old Windows PC onto my Linux box before consigning Windows to history. Because I’m a bit of a squirrel and don’t like throwing old data away, this included stuff like bank correspondence going back many years.
In short, if my PC were to be stolen, there’s an awful lot of personal stuff that could be accessed by trawling through all this old data, so I’ve been looking at the option of encrypting most, if not all, of the data on the PC.
I could try to find all the personal information and move the files into my Truecrypt volume, but this would be time-consuming and tedious. There’s also the concern that, unless the system is fully encrypted, there will always be the possibility of traces being left here and there, or sensitive data being accidentally consigned to a non-encrypted folder at some point in the future.
Truecrypt is fine for relatively small volumes of data, but the fixed volume size is a bit of a pain when larger amounts of data are involved. I’d rather use an on-the-fly encryption mechanism that doesn’t impose a fixed container size, especially as I use rsync to make regular backups.
So, for the ultimate in privacy, I’m drawn towards full disk encryption. But I have reservations about the impact on performance and the risks of getting completely locked out of my data. Apart from making regular backups, is there anything else that can be done to reduce the chances this happening?
What’s the best compromise?
I’ve seen the odd comment that LVM + encryption is not a good idea. Does anyone have any evidence to the contrary?
What about LVM + encryption + RAID 1? Is that a step too far?
Thanks,
Mike