So, i decided to take security at notch up with truecrypt, so i created a 200G volume (on a 500G sata hitachi, boot/swap/ext3, ubuntu 7.04).
I tried to makefs.ext3 the new volume, but it would crash my system around something like "creating inode x")..
I tried makefs.reiserfs and that worked..
Now im copying stuff into the encrypted volume(same disc), and, damn.
Sometimes it'll hover away at 5meg/sec, but then at other times it'll completely stall and/or slow down to like 500k in the proccess.

Just thinking if anyone else had experience with this setup, is the 200G too much? And why does it lag my entire system ? Why did ext3 crash my system?
Thinking i could use a copy utility with adjustable buffer size, ie read 100megs pr. time before writing.. i dont know

help ?

Cy

I have been using True Crypt for over a year. I have found that it is (nearly) transparent as far as system performance is concerned and I'm still using 32 bit single core CPUs. I recently read an article on encrypting disk partitions on Linux. It may have been at Tom's Hardware but I'm not sure. Anyway True Crypt was either the best performer or nearly the best as regards to time.

Are you copying large files?

Are you copying files from one partition to another on the same disk?

How much RAM does your system have?

Is your system swapping at all?

When I have a customer with a disk that only passes 5 MB/sec I tell them that the disk is broken. Even a PATA ATA/100 disk should pass 15 MB/sec on average with bursts to 20 MB/sec. SATA disks should be noticeably faster.

I really don't understand the performance problem if your disk is healthy. What numbers do you see when you are copying files to an unencrypted partition on the same disk?

yea, it was pretty good and fast under windows for sure too..

though i addressed the same question sometime later at the, perhaps more appropiate bbs, truecrypt forums.(had to find it first)

http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=7773

and it seems theres several issues with truecrypt under linux.

to answer your questions

1. Yes, anywhere from a few kb's to half gigs

2. Yes, its content from the same disc, from unencrypted ext3 to the 200G TC volume(wich would not mkfs with ext3, but reiserfs worked)

3. 2GB (P4 3.0ghz)

4. No swapping, just .. stalling/lagging


Even though its large files from disc1 to disc1 it should not stall(noticble with large files) the entire system and drop below 500kb/sec (for a large file??)

Its really rather depressing ..

Thanks for your time ...

That True Crypt forum post is disappointing but I have never had performance problems with True Crypt. I've used various disk interfaces (Firewire, USB, PATA IDE) and it always performed like a champ. I can't tell that it is running on my workstation. I don't have it on a server yet.

Performance can depend a great deal on just what encryption+hash algorithm you specify Truecrypt to use.

Even on a Windows box with an X2/4400 and a 10K Raptor TwoFish-Serpent+Whirlpool would cause severe IO lag.

The more CPU-intensive the encryption, the slower files will copy and--more importantly--the more "lag" you will see with disk operations.

Plain AES is nearly twice as fast as AES-Twofish; Serpent-Twofish-AES is less than half the speed of AES-Twofish... etc...


I recommend AES-Twofish+Whirlpool for balanced performance/security.

Try recreating the volume with lower encryption this time, and compare the results...

Actually i used the default settings (AES?) with regards to encryption, as i remembered, under windows, that it had the best performance.. so i dont think that is what is killing me..

looking into encfs at the moment though .. any thoughts on that ?

Thanks