Official forum for Utopia Community
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Hi=)
I have some secret files and I encrypt them.
But now I wanna encrypt the whole system via BitLocker or VerCrypt.
The advantages if using VeraCrypt over BitLocker are obvious for everyone.
But since I'm a gamer, performance is very important for me, too.
Please, is there someone who tried both solutions and can compare?
Offline
CCleaner is one of the safest programs of its kind, It has everything you need to keep your computer clean of junk. You can expand the cleaning capabilities with CCEhancer.
While Advanced System Care itself is safe, using the program will cause more problems than it can fix.
Offline
I would honestly not use a gaming machine for sensitive work. The two don't go together. You need to isolate your sensitive files on a separate laptop/tablet to achieve maximum security. Gaming software is not known for secure coding conventions, there are many cases of RCE's in them.
Offline
For internal drives you use Bitlocker and for external VeraCrypt.
If you would use VeraCrypt for Windows, it would break a lot of security features which Bitlocker provide.
Performance wise both are fine if you're hardware support AES natively
Offline
I would honestly not use a gaming machine for sensitive work. The two don't go together. You need to isolate your sensitive files on a separate laptop/tablet to achieve maximum security. Gaming software is not known for secure coding conventions, there are many cases of RCE's in them.
I know that this would be best but it's too unpractical for me I always keep sensitive files in separate VeraCrypt containters. But the idea is that I want to encrypt my whole SSD (plus probably my 2 TB standard HDD for data) incuding system as there are some metadata and other stuff that can leave the encrypted files vulnerable
Offline
<p>For internal drives you use Bitlocker and for external VeraCrypt.</p><p>If you would use VeraCrypt for Windows, it would break a lot of security features which Bitlocker provide.</p><p>Performance wise both are fine if you're hardware support AES natively</p>
At this moment, this seems to be the case for me. (Actually, for external I am using BitLocker + VeraCrypt containters for some files ).
Can you please tell me more about your second statement? Which security features would be broken exactly? BTW I am planning to use (strong) password only for BitLocker (or VeraCrypt, but I am inclining to give BitLocker a try at this moment, also partly because of compatibility).
And yeah, my HW support accelerated-AES natively. I would like to know how exactly can I measure eventual slowdown?
Do I understand correctly that only booting + operation with files (copying...) will be possibly slowed and I shouldn't expect any reduction in FPS or anything like that?
I am posting the results of VeraCrypt benchmark. It seems to be pretty fast, I assume it's going to be similar with BitLocker:
Offline
Pages: 1