I have managed to make a VeraCrypt Traveler Disk fit on a 1.44 MB 3.5¨ floppy disk with 34 KB to spare using strong self-extracting compression. Now I want to minimize the overhead of the encrypted FAT container created on another second floppy disk. Allocating the full microfloppy capacity of 1.44 MB, the mounted VeraCrypt volume has a capacity reduction of -299 KB. This leaves less than 80 % of usable FAT12 space remaining on the disk. Is there any way to increase the portion of free space? Where...
I have managed to make a VeraCrypt Traveler Disk fit on a 1.44 MB 3.5¨ floppy disk with 34 KB to spare using strong self-extracting compression. Now I want to minimize the overhead of the encrypted FAT container created on another second floppy disk. Allocating the full microfloppy capacity of 1.44 MB, the mounted VeraCrypt volume has a capacity reduction of -299 KB. This leaves less than 80 % of usable FAT12 space remaining on the disk. Is there any way to increase the portion of free space? Where...
I have managed to make a VeraCrypt Traveler Disk fit on a 1.44 MB 3.5¨ floppy disk with 34 KB to spare using strong self-extracting compression. Now I want to minimize the overhead of the encrypted FAT container created on another second floppy disk. Allocating the full microfloppy capacity of 1.44 MB, the mounted VeraCrypt volume has a capacity reduction of -299 KB. This leaves less than 80 % of usable FAT12 space remaining on the disk. Is there any way to increase the portion of free space? Where...
I have managed to make a VeraCrypt Traveler Disk fit on a 1.44 MB 3.5¨ floppy disk with 34 KB to spare using strong self-extracting compression. Now I want to minimize the overhead of the encrypted FAT container created on another second floppy disk. Allocating the full microfloppy capacity of 1.44 MB, the mounted VeraCrypt volume has a capacity reduction of -299 KB. This leaves less than 80 % of usable FAT12 space remaining on the disk. Is there any way to increase the portion of free space? Where...
I have managed to make a VeraCrypt Traveler Disk fit on a 1.44 MB 3.5¨ floppy disk with 34 KB to spare using strong self-extracting compression. Now I want to minimize the overhead of the encrypted FAT container created on another second floppy disk. Allocating the full microfloppy capacity of 1.44 MB, the mounted VeraCrypt volume has a capacity reduction of -299 KB. This leaves less than 80 % of usable FAT12 space remaining on the disk. Is there any way to increase the portion of free space? Where...
The removal of the GNU GPL license and changed into a proprietary one to Green Gate Systems is interesting. Will more information be released concerning the new v8 features "the disk processing algorithms were highly optimized for speed and efficiency" and "deep action option was added"? What does this mean and what are these changes? What kind of future development based on v8 is planned, and will buying a v8-edition license also bring you free updates? Will the GNU GPL-licensed 7.1 code and releases...
The removal of the GNU GPL license and changed into a proprietary one to Green Gate Systems is interesting. Will more information be released concerning the new v8 features "the disk processing algorithms were highly optimized for speed and efficiency" and "deep action option was added"? What does this mean and what are these changes? What kind of future development based on v8 is planned, and will buying a v8-edition license also bring you free updates?
I am getting the same issue. It helps if you restart Ultra Defragmenter between runs. Hopefully this is fixed in the next update. (using Windows 10)
errors after 300TB of writes, and it took over 700TB to induce the first failures. 300-700 TB isn't much. I'd feel comfortable with a faliure write limit of at least 800 TB. And a read limit of 50 PB at minimum. Why Windows overrides my own choice is beyond me. I will send a compensation bill to Microsoft if my SSD fails in the future and if necessary see them in court. It is not acceptable.
errors after 300TB of writes, and it took over 700TB to induce the first failures. 300-700 TB isn't much. I'd feel comfortable with a faliure write limit of at least 800 TB. Why Windows overrides my own choice is beyond me. I will send a compensation bill to Microsoft if my SSD fails in the future and if necessary see them in court. It is not acceptable.
after 300TB of writes, and it took over 700TB to induce the first failures. 300-700 TB isn't much. I'd feel comfortable with a faliure write limit of at least 800 TB. Why Windows overrides my own choice is beyond me. I will send a compensation bill to Microsoft if my SSD fails in the future and if necessary see them in court. It is not acceptable.
after 300TB of writes, and it took over 700TB to induce the first failures. 300-700 TB isn't much. I'd feel comfortable with a faliure write limit of at least 800 TB. Why Windows overrides my own choice is beyond me. I will send a compensation bill to Microsoft if my SSD fails in the future and if necessary see them in court. It is not acceptable.
Every time I receive major Windows 10 updates, my settings regarding scheduled defragmentation in Windows Defragmenter is enabled. Does UltraDefrag have a solution for this issue? I have 2 SSDs and I try to never defragment them as I don't see any benefits with doing so as SSDs flash cells are of RAM-type, and as data is written around the disks the long-term life-span is degraded.
Since my feature suggestions in other related topics appear to get responses regarding other requests, I've decided to make my own topic. I request a Veracrypt Bootloader feature which supports system encryption with both Keyfiles on an external USB storage unit, and Password authentication. I'm not currently a Veracrypt user, but if this happens I'll become one pretty quickly. Suggested start-up procedure: 1. Have Keyfile USB inserted into Port. 2. Start system and enter Password. 3. Successfull...
Since my feature suggestions in other related topics appear to get responses regarding other requests, I've decided to make my own topic. I request a Veracrypt Bootloader feature which supports both Keyfiles on an external USB storage unit, and Password authentication. I'm not currently a Veracrypt user, but if this happens I'll become one pretty quickly. Suggested start-up procedure: 1. Have Keyfile USB inserted into Port. 2. Start system and enter Password. 3. Successfull boot into OS.
Since my feature suggestions in other related topics appear to get responses regarding other requests, I've decided to make my own topic. I request a Veracrypt Bootloader feature which supports both Keyfiles on an external USB storage unit, and Password authentication. I'm not currently a Veracrypt user, but if this happens I'll become one pretty quickly.
Sounds more like Veracrypt isn't listening for keystrokes, your keyboard appears to be recognized just fine.
Sounds more like Veracrypt isn't listening for keystrokes, you keyboard appears to be recognized just fine.
I am only looking for a keyfile featured Veracrypt bootloader.
I'm very interested in using keyfiles to protect my system drive! https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/workitem/63 https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/workitem/27 Here are the respective proposed features that would enable external keyfiles on e.g. USB-sticks. I would prefer to store a small keyfile together with a bootloader on a USB-drive, then boot the PC from the USB.
A keyfile option in the Pre-Boot Authenticator should be relatively simple to implement. After the password is input by the user, the bootloader scans all available drives for the \veracryptkey\ path-folder. If any such folders are found, the keyfiles are loaded.
A keyfile option in the Pre-Boot Authenticator should be relatively simple to implement. After the password is input by the user, the bootloader scans all available drives for the \veracrypt\ keyfile path folder. If any such folders are found, the keyfiles are loaded.