User:Intgr/temp
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
universal
universally
universality
Contents |
[edit] <tere>a <tt>a</tt> testi kala i
</nowiki>
</nowiki asd asd > test
- I am not trying to imply that I own the article, but I initially intended it to be a comparison of technical features of different software, and ignored user interfaces (password "strength" meters, mouse-operated password entry) and non-encryption related features (autorun, included file wipe tools). Of course I am willing to discuss this.
- I would also dislike a checklist of ciphers and hash functions, since there are simply so many of them (,), and they provide little information for the reader. Many disk encryption solutions support essentially all popular block ciphers, with a couple that are limited to just one. Hash functions are used for widely different purposes, or may not be used at all, so such a checklist comparison would be simply flawed.
- ....
- Also, I find myself grinding my teeth every time another commercial entry creeps into this article, since:
- With the exception of BestCrypt, they simply don't reveal any important details of the implementation, e.g., whether they employ PBKDF2 for key strengthening, which modes of operation are used, etc — features that are critical for their primary function: encryption. The "security by obscurity" defense here is meaningless, as if the information cannot be verified, it does not belong to Wikipedia.
- These entries are normally added for plain and simple advertisement, and the author's agenda is making it look as good as possible, not technical accuracy.
- My two cents. -- intgr 14:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
