• CrackedLinuxISO@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    What I’m getting at is that for people using FDE, any performance hit is worth it compared to worrying that you’ve covered every angle.

    • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      By default, most FDE have horrible performance hits and require significant tweaking, configuring and benchmarking to get it right depending on hardware, use cases, conditions… I’m sure there are quite a bunch of people out there who don’t want to do any tweaking while still having the performance they paid for.

      • ganryuu@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Unless what you are doing is heavily I/O dependant (mostly heavy database workloads), that’s not really true anymore, especially with a modern CPU and say, LUKS encryption. Phoronix has a recent review of FDE using LUKS, and apart from synthetic I/O tests, the difference isn’t really observable.

        Try cryptsetup benchmark on your pc and look at the results for aes-xts for example.