VeraCrypt Review

It works!  I recently switched to VeraCrypt from TrueCrypt, because TrueCrypt is now unsupported and rumor has it that technology was making TrueCrypt less and less secure.  I do not use Partition/Device encryption or System encryption, only Volume Encryption, meaning that specially-created "container" files in the normal unencrypted Windows environment are mounted as encrypted volumes exactly as if they were separate, encrypted disk drives.  I keep my personal and business files there, and I do it this way because it is simple, because backup of those container files is trivially easy, and because there is zero risk of a complete failure.

If you want to know more about Partition/Device encryption or System encryption, the information in this post may not help you.

A year ago I wrote about TrueCrypt Forks. I didn't like VeraCrypt then because it took a very long time, a minute or more, to open a container after entering the correct password.  This was by design - the VeraCrypt developer, Idrassi, by default uses hundreds of thousands of iterations in the key derivation function, contending that it helps protect against brute-force attacks, where a computer is automatically trying billions of password guesses.  He is right - this method of attack is becoming faster and more effective as computer power increases and multiple processors can be brought to bear.  However, I open and close encrypted volumes frequently and the defaults pushed my patience too far.

Happily, the current version of VeraCrypt, Release 1.17, offers a compromise:  If the password is 20 characters or more, VeraCrypt allows the user to bypass the defaults and choose a lower number of iterations by specifying a Personal Iteration Multiplier (PIM).  The minimum multiplier of 1 will still result in an iteration count 8 to 16 times greater than that used in TrueCrypt, with a very short delay, whereas multipliers in the range of 10 to 100 will increase security but will cause somewhat greater delays.  Those delays might still be acceptable, depending on the speed of the processor. I experimented with several different PIM values.

The PIM is a secret value, chosen when the container file is created, and it must be entered correctly as a separate parameter when the password is entered to mount an encrypted volume.  Therefore, though the PIM may be used to reduce the iteration count and make a brute force attack easier, it also effectively increases the password strength, making the attack more difficult again.

I use passwords of 20 characters or more anyway, so the PIM is a perfect compromise.  During the process of creating new volumes I did have to wait through some long delays, but now that the volumes are created and in place, the delays are quite acceptable.  PIM works.

Also interesting, VeraCrypt can actively coexist with TrueCrypt on the same system, running at the same time.  I created new VeraCrypt containers and copied the encrypted contents of the old mounted TrueCrypt volumes directly into the mounted VeraCrypt volumes with no problems.  During that process, none of the encrypted files were ever decrypted on disk.  That's cool - no disk wiping required.  Actually, VeraCrypt can mount most TrueCrypt volumes (though not my oldest ones), so the applications might not have to coexist, but it was slick.

I rarely use the TrueCrypt or VeraCrypt console, instead using command-line scripts (cmd.exe processor) to automatically mount and dismount volumes, create backups of volumes, copy volumes to the cloud and to other computers, and more.  Every script that worked with TrueCrypt still works with VeraCrypt, after just changing the run path.  It just works, no errors, no problems.

For a thorough, functional test I uploaded a 3 GB encrypted container full of files to the cloud, using both iDrive and CloudBerry, then downloaded that same file back to the desktop.  Using Microsoft's comp program, the files compared exactly with the original in each case.  Also, in each case, the downloaded encrypted container opened without issue, the true proof that the file was not corrupted.

I use VeraCrypt on two computers, a desktop and a laptop,  The desktop runs a clean install of Windows 10 (it once ran Vista), and the laptop runs Windows 10 upgraded from Windows 7.  Both have plenty of RAM and disk, with dual processors in the 2 - 3 GHz range.

My congratulations to Mounir Idrassi, the force behind VeraCrypt.  I'll be making a PayPal donation to the cause.

By the way:  I also downloaded CipherShed, intending to compare it with VeraCrypt.  However, the CipherShed installer informed me that I would have to uninstall TrueCrypt first.  Since I want to keep TrueCrypt around, I did not install CipherShed.