13 Nov
2014
13 Nov
'14
11:31 a.m.
Hi
I'm thinking about protecting my data with encryption. I know it's a
complex matter, and very hard (impossible?) to make a system 100%
protected. And I must admit I don't fully understand the technical
workings of the various available tools, but I found
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/disk_encryption.
Now I'm wondering:
1) Can anyone share hands-on experience with a particular strategy, why
did you choose that particular tool, is it easy to setup and work with
in every-day use?
2) Most importantly: How will the various methods affect my systems
ability to perform under realtime conditions (jack) including
reading/writing files from a DAW?
NB: I'm running debian stable, if it matters...
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
13 Nov
13 Nov
1:26 p.m.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Now I'm wondering:
1) Can anyone share hands-on experience with a particular strategy, why
did you choose that particular tool, is it easy to setup and work with
in every-day use?
My laptop is encrypted from top till toe, because i tend to have it with me
everywhere. I encrypted the disk and also the /home. To do this i used the
tools given among the options at installation with ubuntu (in my case its
ubuntustudio, maybe there is a difference in tools IDK) I assume this may
not be the safest way in our galaxy, but then again, my secrets are rather
uninteresting for those who need galaxyproof encryption. I just don't want
anyone to be able to reset my passwords or read my mother and my GF's
love-mails in case i lose my laptop... :)
2) Most importantly: How will the various methods
affect my systems
ability to perform under realtime conditions (jack) including
reading/writing files from a DAW?
NB: I'm running debian stable, if it matters...
I have noticed that upstart is quite slow, but once everything is running,
there might be performance reduction, but it never caused me trouble or
made itself noticeable.
Hope you get more detailed answers! i'm interested in the subject, but like
you i don't "fully understand the technical
workings of the various available tools"....
Good luck!
--
Set Hallström
AKA
reSet Sakrecoer
http://sakrecoer.com
1:40 p.m.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 13:26:48 +0100
Set Hallström <sakrecoer(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I just don't want anyone to be able to reset my
passwords or read my
mother and my GF's love-mails in case i lose my laptop... :)
Unfortunately I'm a single, so I don't get emails with compromising
selfies from a GF at the moment, so fortunately I don't need encryption
and IMHO I guess it's good not to encrypt DAW real-time read/write data.
Set, I hope for you, that you don't get love-mails from your mother,
but just from your GF.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus
;p.
Regards,
Ralf
3:09 p.m.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com>
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus
;p.
Regards,
Ralf
Ralf,
Please allow me to consider my deep respect for you, in conjunction with
your interaction as a manifestation of Love :{)
TBPH, the previousline of this wet-ware code, is one of the core modules
of the day-to-day Aikido combos
that allow me to be rather confortable in my relation to most beeing,
including robots.
(": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aikido :")
(:
Now, after researching a clever link about Universal-Love thru time and
mythologies, i stumbled upon this. :)
(": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Love so i'm going to go listen
to some of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MFSB
(:
(}:
Warm regards from cold Sweden,
Set
--
Set Hallström
AKA
reSet Sakrecoer
http://sakrecoer.com
7:22 p.m.
I wonder if it's really a good idea to encrypt real-time
audio read/write data?
I wouldn't do this!
What are your experiences?
Regards,
Ralf
OT:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:09:43 +0100
Set Hallström <sakrecoer(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com> wrote:
Now,
after researching a clever link about Universal-Love thru time
and mythologies, i stumbled upon this. :)
(": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Love so i'm going to go
listen to some of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MFSB
It's much easier to hit back. Oedipus and the Oedipus complex
are from the, resp. base on the Greek mythology. The Western world is
based on the Greek civilisation, so we are aware of non-sexual love.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_love
;)
Anyway, two words "love" and "mother" in one sentence are always good
for a joke, Woody Allen makes his living by making films about that and
similar jokes ;).
So my apologies, but I couldn't resist.
8:35 p.m.
New subject: OT: encryption and performance penalty
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:22:02 +0100
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com> wrote:
OT:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:09:43 +0100
Set Hallström <sakrecoer(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Btw., since it's a list for artists. After watching Jim Jarmusch's
Ghost Dog I read half of the Hagakure. It's worse to watch the movie,
reading the Hagakure is hardcore, because it's absolutely ridiculous.
However, the declaration of love among gay samurai easily could end
with beheading and the whole book is riddled with superstition and
similar absurd reasons for violence. Star Trek's Klingon's are not
nearly as grotesk as the Samurai were. OTOH the Hagakure is about
passion, love. What a few of us feel for music, is what those warriors
felt for violence. IOW the book could be a kind of mirror ;). We
shouldn't take music too seriously ;), otherwise we risk to act
"strange".
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com> wrote:
Now,
after researching a clever link about Universal-Love thru time
and mythologies, i stumbled upon this. :)
(": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Love so i'm going to go
listen to some of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MFSB
It's much easier to hit back. Oedipus and the Oedipus complex
are from the, resp. base on the Greek mythology. The Western world is
based on the Greek civilisation, so we are aware of non-sexual love.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_love
;)
Anyway, two words "love" and "mother" in one sentence are always
good
for a joke, Woody Allen makes his living by making films about that
and similar jokes ;).
So my apologies, but I couldn't resist. 
8:50 p.m.
On 11/13/2014 11:31 AM, Atte wrote:
Hi
I'm thinking about protecting my data with encryption. I know it's a
complex matter, and very hard (impossible?) to make a system 100%
protected. And I must admit I don't fully understand the technical
workings of the various available tools, but I found
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/disk_encryption.
Now I'm wondering:
1) Can anyone share hands-on experience with a particular strategy, why
did you choose that particular tool, is it easy to setup and work with
in every-day use?
Hello Atte,
I'm using the default encryption that came with my notebook, eCryptfs.
It was super easy to set up as it's an option during the install of
Ubuntu and I don't notice it being there actually.
2) Most importantly: How will the various methods affect my systems
ability to perform under realtime conditions (jack) including
reading/writing files from a DAW?
Unfortunately I haven't stressed this setup under real-time conditions
yet. But so far I have had no real issues when recording band
repetitions or when trying to compose tracks. I can't go lower than
128/48000*3 but that's mainly because this setup isn't tuned for
real-time work.
NB: I'm running debian stable, if it matters...
Cheers
Jeremy
9:06 p.m.
Unfortunately I haven't stressed this setup under
real-time conditions
yet. But so far I have had no real issues when recording band
repetitions or when trying to compose tracks. I can't go lower than
128/48000*3 but that's mainly because this setup isn't tuned for
real-time work.
8 ms is much better, then what I can do with my non-encrypted desktop
PC and a RME audio card. IOW I guess it's important to mention how many
audio/MIDI tracks are read/write during a session. "128/48000*3" without
knowing what you exactly did, is a vague information.
11:42 p.m.
On 11/13/2014 02:31 AM, Atte wrote:
I'm thinking about protecting my data with
encryption. I know it's a
complex matter, and very hard (impossible?) to make a system 100%
protected. And I must admit I don't fully understand the technical
workings of the various available tools, but I found
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/disk_encryption.
Now I'm wondering:
1) Can anyone share hands-on experience with a particular strategy, why
did you choose that particular tool, is it easy to setup and work with
in every-day use?
2) Most importantly: How will the various methods affect my systems
ability to perform under realtime conditions (jack) including
reading/writing files from a DAW?
NB: I'm running debian stable, if it matters...
LUKS, dm-crypt, and the Debian installer make partition-based drive
encryption easy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dm-crypt
Intel added AES-NI to their CPU's a few years ago, which helps with
encrypted drive performance (and is supported by Wheezy):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES_instruction_set
STFW for benchmarks, I've seen anywhere from 2x to 10x improvement in
encrypted disk performance without AES-NI vs. with AES-NI. It's hard to
isolate -- there are many other significant factors in real systems
doing real work.
My subjective experience with SOHO desktops and servers with respect to
drives is that going from HDD to SSD has the most dramatic impact on
performance. dm-crypt encryption causes a noticeable slow-down on older
machines without AES-NI when launching applications or doing bulk
transfers (half speed?), but it's not a deal-breaker. My Core i7-2600S
system with AES-NI, 8 GB RAM, and encrypted SSD is so much quicker than
everything else that I don't notice. I've done some light music work on
both kinds of machines, and haven't encountered any problems due to
encrypted drive performance.
I suggest that you get yourself a newer SSD and give it a try. :-)
HTH,
David
p.s. The old-fashioned trick of increasing RAM to improve performance is
just as valid today as it ever was. How much RAM do you have in your
machine, what is it's capacity, and how much RAM and swap are in use
when you are doing your heaviest music work?
14 Nov
14 Nov
12:53 a.m.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, David Christensen wrote:
p.s. The old-fashioned trick of increasing RAM to
improve performance is just
as valid today as it ever was. How much RAM do you have in your machine,
what is it's capacity, and how much RAM and swap are in use when you are
doing your heaviest music work?
This would be my thought too. In general, any project I have done so far
uses less than 2.5 G memory. Most modern machines can handle 16GB (I
actually have 8)... most of my sessions probably don't need to access the
drive while recording/tracking/mixing.
In my opinion, swap should show zero use during audio work. Even with
swappiness set to 10 (some set it to 1 or 0) I have not had swap space
being used. It is good to have swap enabled though, because if you do get
there, at least you can save what you have done. I have found that in an
OOM event it seems to be some part of the DE that gets kicked out as
having not been used for a while which kills everything. Going into swap
will hurt the current take (big time), but the system will at least still
be running so whatever can be saved. Lots of snapshots is good too.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
4:58 p.m.
I'm using luks/LVM on my Thinkpad T430s, using a -ck kernel and I've got
16Gb of RAM. I don't notice or perceive a slowdown at all, even though I
bet e.g. startup would be a little snappier without encryption on. I
haven't A/B tested it, encryption is just a prerequisite for my systems
these days, and the performance is still excellent.
-w
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, at 11:31, Atte wrote:
Hi
I'm thinking about protecting my data with encryption. I know it's a
complex matter, and very hard (impossible?) to make a system 100%
protected. And I must admit I don't fully understand the technical
workings of the various available tools, but I found
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/disk_encryption.
Now I'm wondering:
1) Can anyone share hands-on experience with a particular strategy, why
did you choose that particular tool, is it easy to setup and work with
in every-day use?
2) Most importantly: How will the various methods affect my systems
ability to perform under realtime conditions (jack) including
reading/writing files from a DAW?
NB: I'm running debian stable, if it matters...
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
15 Nov
15 Nov
2:10 a.m.
On 11/14/2014 07:58 AM, William Light wrote:
I'm using luks/LVM on my Thinkpad T430s, using a
-ck kernel and I've got
16Gb of RAM. I don't notice or perceive a slowdown at all, even though I
bet e.g. startup would be a little snappier without encryption on. I
haven't A/B tested it, encryption is just a prerequisite for my systems
these days, and the performance is still excellent.
Nice. That machine has a Core i7-2530M processor, which also has Secure
Key (e.g. hardware pseudo-random number generator, PRNG):
http://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-ThinkPad-T430s-23539WU-Notebook/dp/B009UESY2I
http://ark.intel.com/products/64893/Intel-Core-i7-3520M-Processor-4M-Cache-…
So, you should be able to generate pseudo-random numbers very quickly.
This will expedite erasing encrypted partitions and devices, generating
white noise, and other uses.
Here's a crude PRN benchmark for my Pentium 4 3.4E GHz HT machine:
2014-11-14 16:58:52 dpchrist@p43400e ~
$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 13.0431 s, 8.0 MB/s
And, for my Core i7-2600S machine:
2014-11-14 17:00:09 dpchrist@i72600s ~
$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 6.90355 s, 15.2 MB/s
(It appears that /dev/urandom uses a single thread, as the Pentium as
one core and the i7 has four, but the i7 isn't four times faster.)
How well does your laptop perform on the above /dev/urandom benchmark?
/dev/random blocks waiting for entropy on both of the above machines.
How about your laptop?
David
16 Nov
16 Nov
9:13 a.m.
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014, at 02:12, David Christensen wrote:
On 11/14/2014 05:10 PM, David Christensen wrote:
Correction: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3320M CPU @ 2.60GHz
will@ashland ~% dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 5.68905 s, 18.4 MB/s
-w
Core i7-2530M processor
Correction: Core i7-3520M processor
17 Nov
17 Nov
midnight
On 11/16/2014 12:13 AM, William Light wrote:
Correction: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3320M CPU @ 2.60GHz
I guess the model on Amazon has an updated CPU (?).
http://ark.intel.com/products/64896/Intel-Core-i5-3320M-Processor-3M-Cache-…
will@ashland ~% dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M
count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 5.68905 s, 18.4 MB/s
That's only marginally faster than my i7-2600S. I wonder if your kernel
is making use of your CPU's Secure Key feature?
What Linux distribution and kernel do you have?
2014-11-16 14:57:26 dpchrist@i72600s ~
$ cat /etc/debian_version
7.7
2014-11-16 14:57:30 dpchrist@i72600s ~
$ uname -a
Linux i72600s 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.2.63-2+deb7u1 x86_64
GNU/Linux
David
1:54 a.m.
On 17/11/14 10:00, David Christensen wrote:
On 11/16/2014 12:13 AM, William Light wrote:
Interesting. Similar to my unencrypted Core2Duo.
roger@brain:~$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 5.5929 s, 18.7 MB/s
roger@brain:~$ inxi -b
System: Host: brain Kernel: 3.17-2.towo-siduction-amd64 x86_64 (64
bit) Desktop: KDE 4.14.2
Distro: siduction 13.2.0 December - kde - (201312310241)
Machine: Mobo: Gigabyte model: EP45-UD3R v: x.x Bios: Award v: F3
date: 09/18/2008
CPU: Dual core Intel Core2 Duo E8500 (-MCP-) speed/max: 2000/3166 MHz
This is not my DAW distro, which is a separate multiboot installation.
Cheers
Roger
Correction: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3320M CPU @
2.60GHz...
will@ashland ~% dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null
bs=1M count=100
100+0 records in
100+0 records out
104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 5.68905 s, 18.4 MB/s
That's only marginally faster than my i7-2600S. I wonder if your
kernel is making use of your CPU's Secure Key feature?
What Linux distribution and kernel do you have?
2014-11-16 14:57:26 dpchrist@i72600s ~
$ cat /etc/debian_version
7.7
2014-11-16 14:57:30 dpchrist@i72600s ~
$ uname -a
Linux i72600s 3.2.0-4-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.2.63-2+deb7u1 x86_64
GNU/Linux
David
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
1 Dec
1 Dec
1:41 a.m.
linux-audio-user:
I worked up a Perl script to benchmark the Linux entropy pool and random
numbers, and posted it to the debian-user mailing list:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/11/msg01913.html
David
3673
days inactive
3691
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
16 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Atte -
David Christensen -
Jeremy Jongepier -
Len Ovens -
Ralf Mardorf -
Roger -
Set Hallström -
William Light