Anyone else convinced AES-256 is not long enough a but length for full disk encryption anymore? Even the 512-bit schemes are just trying some offset-salts that, with ~10TB I worry about providing close-enough statistical significance for cryptanalysis.
With 100TB drives?! I am less worried and more… convinced its a problem.
I have to admit, that I never looked into the technical details of full disk encryption
If I understand you correctly, they are using the same key for all the data and with larger amounts of data statistical analysis becomes feasible
Did I get this right?
Couldn’t that be solved by using a root key + salt per block/sector/file/whatever?
I’d still only need the one root key and with every block the actual encryption key changes
I was thinking about perfect forward secrecy and that was the first thing, I could come up with
But, I’m absolutely not a crypto/math guy, so probably I don’t know enough to really add something to the discussion/solution…
Anyone else convinced AES-256 is not long enough a but length for full disk encryption anymore? Even the 512-bit schemes are just trying some offset-salts that, with ~10TB I worry about providing close-enough statistical significance for cryptanalysis.
With 100TB drives?! I am less worried and more… convinced its a problem.
I have to admit, that I never looked into the technical details of full disk encryption
If I understand you correctly, they are using the same key for all the data and with larger amounts of data statistical analysis becomes feasible
Did I get this right?
Couldn’t that be solved by using a root key + salt per block/sector/file/whatever?
I’d still only need the one root key and with every block the actual encryption key changes
I was thinking about perfect forward secrecy and that was the first thing, I could come up with
But, I’m absolutely not a crypto/math guy, so probably I don’t know enough to really add something to the discussion/solution…