I've written before suggesting the use of Linux for open source drive imaging and it seems there has been some movement in this direction. About a year after my initial posting the folks at PackRatStudios posted this article with a list of free and open source alternatives to the Symantec Ghost software. A quick look at the utilities they reviewed indicates that there is still much work to be done on using Linux as a disk imaging platform, particularly when it comes to ease of use and filesystem (NTFS in particular) support. On the other hand we're much further along than we were and progress is clearly being made.

About a month and a half ago I wrote about open source whole disk encryption software (this was just before TrueCrypt 5 came out) and mentioned an open source program called DiskCryptor which has been available since late fall and was the first open source whole drive encryption (system partition encryption) utility to support Windows that I'm aware of.

DiskCryptor has releases hosted on SourceForge and additional information on the primary developer's website. Though the developer's site is in Russian the Google translation facility does an ok job of translating it.

I started using DiskCryptor a few weeks before TrueCrypt 5 came out and was really impressed. Once TrueCrypt was released I tried that and while I do appreciate some aspects of the super redundancy in TrueCrypt whole disk encryption I soon went back to using DiskCryptor for a couple of reasons.

First, I had problems with TrueCrypt blue-screening on me and sometimes preventing my system from shutting down properly (it would sometimes reboot instead of shutting down). This made me quite uncomfortable as I was trusting my data to the software. I understand there have been a few patches to TrueCrypt since I tested version 5.0 which fixes some of the problems people were having and which I have not tried yet but there are other reasons I prefer DiskCryptor.

Second, while all the hand holding and redundant systems in TrueCrypt do make it (to some extent) dummy-resistant they are actually quite a pain when being utilized by a power user and there is no way to bypass them. In some cases it is either inconvenient or unnecessary to create a recovery CD. DiskCryptor does not require that a recovery CD be created and has different, perhaps more robust methods of recovering the data should the need arise.

Third, DiskCryptor supports hibernation! This is reason enough to use DiskCryptor for many laptop users. I understand that TrueCrypt 5.1 includes hibernation support but it appears a bug may have been introduced at the same time with dire consequences for drive security. Read about this bug in English and see the code problem in Russian. This may be fixed in TreuCrypt 5.1a but is not specifically mentioned as fixed in the TrueCrypt changelog as far as I can see.

Fourth, DiskCryptor has (in my mind) more robust/useful recovery options. This is for several reasons. While there is no recovery CD or extensive boot loader decryption ala TrueCrypt the encrypted volumes are fully compatible with standard TrueCrypt encrypted volumes (including pre-TrueCrypt 5). This means you can take a DiskCryptor encrypted volume and physically attach the drive to another system or boot into another OS and then mount and decrypt the drive with TrueCrypt. You cannot even do this with TrueCrypt encrypted drives as the technology behind TrueCrypt whole drive encryption is not compatible with regular TrueCrypt encrypted volumes. To me this is really exciting and useful as it allows me to move drives between systems and retain access to the encrypted data. There is also a BartPE plugin for DiskCryptor so you can boot from a BartPE CD and decrypt/access the encrypted drive. Finally, support is in version 0.3 (coming out shortly) for installing the DiskCryptor boot code on other media (eg. flash memory keys, CD-ROMs, etc.)

Fifth, DiskCryptor appears to be faster than TrueCrypt 5 WDE. At least on my system I noticed no slowdown with DiskCryptor but TrueCrypt 5 significantly slowed down my disk intensive operations. This is a major reason I personally switched back to DiskCryptor and I'm not the only one as evidenced by some posts in the DiskCryptor forums which indicate that in terms of MB/s DiskCryptor is as much as twice as fast as TrueCrypt 5, at least on some systems. Based on my experience I would agree. I understand there have been some performance enhancements in TrueCrypt 5.1a which include some assembly optimization (which was already a part of DiskCryptor) and I have not had a chance to test this latest version yet but believe speed improvements have also been made in the latest version of DiskCryptor which may still give it the edge.

Sixth, the development of DiskCryptor is both more active and more responsive to users than TrueCrypt. "ntldr" the developer of DiskCryptor has been very open to suggestions and very responsive to users through the forum on their website http://freed0m.org/forum the same cannot be said for TrueCrypt. Based on what I've seen from various TrueCrypt users they have been often ignored by the TrueCrypt developers who seem to be a small group of developers who do not respond particularly well to users or accept development assistance (one of the major benefits of open source development). The disenfranchised users include the DiskCryptor developer "ntldr" along with OS X users who started a project called OS X Crypt because of the unresponsive nature of TrueCrypt developers. I think this potentially will be a huge problem for TrueCrypt and it makes me somewhat concerned about the motives and long term success of the TrueCrypt development team. This is also manifested in the somewhat restrictive nature of the TrueCrypt source license compared with other open source licenses such as the GPL (which is used by DiskCryptor). While TrueCrypt may be open source it is most definitely not GPL software and not GPL compatible (read about the issues of including this with GPL software here)

There is one downside to DiskCryptor, there is currently no real help file or instructions for using it but I was able to figure it out by looking at the menu options all of which seem fairly straightforward to me. This is an acknowledged flaw and is being actively worked on by a few DiskCryptor users. In the meantime the primary developer is more concerned about enhancing the feature set and eradicating bugs than on developing documentation, an understandable position for many volunteer software developers.

Communication and publicity is not a strong suit for DiskCryptor and this may be partially to the fact that English is not the first language of the developer. In my opinion this, more than anything, is holding back what is otherwise an excellent (and in my mind superior to TrueCrypt) product. Much of the information is available but it's in the DiskCryptor forums which contain a mix of Russian and English making them not the most user friendly way to learn about the software. There has also been little tech press coverage of the program.

I am not so much trying to make the case by myself that DiskCryptor is a better product for everyone, though it was for me. I am trying to bring some attention to the first open source whole disk encryption program (there was even a Wikipedia vote where it was decided to eliminate the page for DiskCryptor as non-notable and where people seriously questioned if it was just a knock off of TrueCrypt 5!) and encourage others to talk about and try DiskCryptor. Certainly the program could use some English language press if it is to grow significantly. Hopefully by explaining my reasons for selecting DiskCryptor as my choice I've encouraged you to at least keep an open mind and try the software then write and share your experience with others.

My laptop is one of the IBM (Lenovo) Thinkpads which includes a fingerprint reader and TPM chip which can be used to both unlock the system at boot and log on to Windows using software supplied with the computer. One thing that the supplied software does not do but something that I've been interested in doing is whole disk encryption (something also called by a few other names depending on the vendor and software.

You can learn more about whole disk encryption in this article written by Bruce Schneier a couple of months ago or from the Wikipedia article. Essentially the idea is to encrypt the entire hard drive rather than a small subset of files. Obviously this does not protect the files while the computer is operating but is especially useful if you have a laptop (something prone to being stolen) and want to ensure that if someone stole it the data on it would be useless. While some free utilities such as TrueCrypt have allowed you to encrypt entire volumes they have not allowed you to encrypt the boot drive, at least not when using the Windows operating system. You see the trick with encrypting the boot drive is that you need to unencrypt it for the system to boot so a driver must be loaded at boot time which will prompt the user for a password and thus unlock the key allowing the drive to be unencrypted and the system booted. Until recently there were no free or open source programs which allowed you to do this with the Windows OS (solutions for Linux were available).

In the span of just over a month that has all changed. In December a Russian security consultant released the open source program DiskCryptor (and on SourceForge) which allows you to install a Windows driver (which can be renamed for extra obscurity) which will encrypt your drive and also allow you to install a boot time driver onto the disk which allows for the encryption of the boot volume. The encryption algorithm and container is TrueCrypt compatible so if need be you can access the drive by putting it in another computer which has TrueCrypt installed and mount the volume (with the appropriate password of course). This is an especially nice touch as it ensures some kind of compatibility between the open source projects and makes data recovery from an otherwise dead system a bit less problematic. I've been successfully running DiskCryptor on my laptop boot drive for several weeks now and have found the program works as advertised though there is essentially no help file or other documentation so you have to learn the program by playing around with it and looking at menus.

Later today TrueCrypt plans to release version 5.0 of their popular open source encryption software which among other things promises to include a boot driver for Windows systems which will allow the encryption of the boot drive. I plan to try out this software once it becomes available. I am excited to see that there will be two open source solutions to whole drive encryption and look forward to improvements in one or both of the programs.

A few things to note. Neither of these solutions (as far as I'm aware) supports the TPM chip and fingerprint reader in my laptop. This means that you need to enter a separate password to unlock the hard drive in addition to unlocking the computer. It also means that the encryption is all taking place in software and utilizing CPU cycles and slowing down drive access times. While I haven't noticed a pronounced effect in my usual word processing and Internet browsing on this system I can see that this might be problematic for a media or gaming intensive situation. Hopefully advancements to these solutions will allow for better integration with hardware acceleration and authentication to improve this situation.

Occasionally I have the need to have someone who is not as technically literate as myself send me a CD image. In the past I've recommended a number of shareware utilities (most of which are for ISO manipulation including extraction) but these are often more powerful than what the person needs and the associated cost is a disincentive. More recently I've found a piece of freeware from Lucersoft called LC ISO creator which does nothing but create ISO images of CDs and DVDs. It's pretty difficult to make a mistake with a piece of software this simple.

Now if only there was a good open-source cross-platform GUI ISO manipulation utility that allowed for the creation, extraction and modification of ISO files. I've been really happy with InfraRecorder so I'm hoping something similar comes along in this vein.

Just last year I was lamenting about the lack of good open source CD recording software for the Win32 platform. I've been thrilled with k3b for Linux and was hoping that someone would come out with something similar for Windows. As the formally great Nero Burning ROM software has become more and more a bloated piece of junkware there have been several interesting developments on the CD recording software front.

First, the very unofficial "Nero Light" and "Nero Light Micro" setups of the Nero software have become increasingly popular with people "in the know". Not produced by Ahead Nero Software these are slimmed versions of the Nero trial version from the Ahead software page which can be activated with a regular Nero key but which contain far less bloatware (13-35MB instead of 170+). While I haven't tried them myself I hear they provide the most used functionality without throwing in the kitchen sink. Nero has grown far beyond simple disc burning software which is all I ever used it for and which has caused me to leave it behind.

Second, there are now two open source contenders for CD recording in Windows. Both are technically frontends to a Windows port of the command line cdrecord engine but so is k3b (requires Linux) which has been my favorite since dumping Nero. Even though I do most of my burning with k3b in Linux these days it is occasionally useful to burn something in Windows so I'm testing these as replacements for Nero on that platform.

Both cdrtfe and InfraRecorder provide basic CD burning capability on the Win32 platform though there are a few advantages and disadvantages to each. Cdrtfe is a bit more mature software but is also more complicated, has a less familiar interface and, let's face it, not the best name in the world. On the other hand InfraRecorder is a lot easier to remember, has a clean, slick interface and is quickly gaining momentum but is quite a bit newer and has fewer configuration options at the moment. Personally, I really like the way InfraRecorder looks and feels which does count for something in software design and I've heard great things about the primary developer Christian Kindahl so I look forward to watching this product mature. Both packages allow for basic CD/DVD creation as well as ISO image burning and should already serve the majority of users' needs, best of all they are both free and open source solutions.