Re: symmetric keys

[Tom M. <tme...@vl...>]

Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Tom Metro wrote:
>>Although if you compared two scenarios:
>>
>>1. keeping they keys, but throwing away the encrypted files after each
>>run;
>>
>>and
>>
>>2. keeping the encrypted files, but opting not to store the keys in
>>external files;
>>
>>I think #2 would be a big win. In most cases, the prior version of the
>>encrypted file will be left untouched. Occasionally, when a file has
>>changed, you'll need to decrypt the meta data in order to produce a
>>new encrypted file, but decrypting a few kilobytes of meta data from a
>>known location should be reasonably quick, as CPU time for
>>decompression/compression is proportional to the data quantity.
> 
> The keys directory will typically be a fraction the size of the
> encrypted files. How can you possibly compare the two?

This was a continuation of a thread in which one of the opening 
assumptions was that CPU was a more limited resource than disk storage. 
The "big win" I refer to above is with respect to CPU usage.

  -Tom

-- 
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/e/fps/3452158/