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.

Truecrypt Forks

January 25, 2015:

As everyone knows, the anonymous creators of Truecrypt have declared it unsupported and hinted that it might be defective. While no one believes that Truecrypt has a security hole (see Gibson for example), and an initial audit did not find one, everyone wants to find a supported substitute.

I use Truecrypt encrypted container files to encrypt sensitive data on my Windows systems.  A container is a file which can be mounted as if it were a separate unencrypted volume.   Truecrypt can also encrypt entire disk volumes, though I do not use that mode, because of the complication and because containers are so easily backed up with full encryption to multiple destinations including the Cloud, Blu-Ray discs, hard discs, and thumb drives.

Requirements:

• To reduce the likelihood of a hole or a back door, the software must be open source.  This rules out all commercial encryption software.
• It must support some kind of portable encrypted containers.
• It should have a credible support team.

BitLocker is not a candidate because it is not open source and does not conveniently produce encrypted containers.

In my search for a Truecrypt substitute, here is what I found today. Things are moving fast, so this may not hold true for long:

https://ciphershed.org/	US, UK, Germany, Asia	Available as pre-alpha release
https://truecrypt.ch/	Switzerland	Downloads Truecrypt 7.1a
https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/	France	Rev 1.0f-1 downloaded and working

CipherShed is currently in a pre-alpha release only, apparently using some Truecrypt code and some new code. They caution against using it in production. Purportedly it will eventually all be new code, and with a team to support it. Currently I'll stick with Truecrypt 7.1a until (1) a problem is discovered in it, or (2) CipherShed or some other supported program is available.

Truecrypt.ch (also called TCnext) seems to be two Swiss guys who want to fork Truecrypt but, for now, are simply offering Truecrypt 7.1a, the final good release, on a download site. I suspect they are watching CipherShed and may eventually support that.

Veracrypt is the only fork currently available as an official release, and is a modest modification of the original Truecrypt open-source code. Apparently it is mostly written and supported by one Frenchman, Idrassi, and long-term support may be dependent on him, though there is a lively discussion board.

I have installed it, to discover that opening a container takes a long time, but he defends that as necessary to defeat a brute force attack.  In that respect, he believes that Veracrypt is quite superior to Truecrypt.  That judgment is above my pay grade.  Otherwise it walks and talks just like Truecrypt.  I have not tried any command-line arguments yet - I use those a lot in Truecrypt.

The delay on opening is dependent on a particular iteration count, and there is discussion about allowing the user to trade off password length versus iteration count, so that a longer password could result in a shorter opening time.

Veracrypt containers are not compatible with Truecrypt containers, but Veracrypt does have a Truecrypt mode.  I tried that and it did successfully open a Truecrypt container. I didn't try modifying the files in that container.

I recommend tuning in to those sites from time to time, to keep abreast of their progress.  I may or may not blog about it again.