Why isn't system encryption standard nowadays? Most people now use mobile devices (laptops, smartphones...

Why isn't system encryption standard nowadays? Most people now use mobile devices (laptops, smartphones, tablets) which are basically asked to get lost or stolen.

Attached: laptop of the future.jpg (770x433, 64K)

wtf is that thing?

looks like a poor person that enjoys apples.

Most people do not care or know people can get into it easily. They would prefer it to be easier to fix or retrieve stuff if they mess up.

Reduced performance and battery life. It's better to just encrypt certain files (personal stuff, application data) than the entire system.

I'm pretty sure encryption is forced with most android devices

that was exactly what I wanted to say.

pointless overhead

>It's better to just encrypt certain files (personal stuff, application data) than the entire system.
But this isn't common, either.

An acer aspire R7.

Wrong. SSDs nowadays have hardware accelerated encryption with TPM integrated.

It's a piece of shit.

Most people give their personal details away for free too.

>libers: heh heh nothin' to hide nothin' to fear kid
>we dont need that shit its for hackers
>apple has encryp by default for years

This.

Normies don't give a shit about security.
They also don't think about what might happen, which is why they never make backups.

>libers
this is funny because repubs is the one trying to ban encryption.

Doesn't fit anyone's agenda.

It's standard at my company. All laptops must be harddrive encrypted.

Both sides are the same shit pretty much.
They only fight because they have a different religion.

If you have anything on your laptop that you want to protect, then system encryption is probably pretty pointless since a motivated attacker can pull the DRAM out and read their contents, including the secondary storage encryption keys. If you cool the DRAM chips down before moving them over, they retain most of their information over several seconds, so a motivated attacker could do that with little trouble. An unmotivated attacker would probably be discouraged just by running Linux.

>They only fight because they have a different religion.
Yes, irreligious people such as yourself is above such petty conflicts, amirite.

Attached: fedora-2.png (506x538, 216K)

Both sides do it, one side is just more underhanded.
Don't be an idiot.

>I don't need encryption because I have nothing valuable or secret on it
>yeah of course my credit card details and online banking passwords are stored in my browser and I have my email open with all my tax returns and a copy of my passport, why?

>steal laptop
>pull out hard drive
>connect it to another computer
>see all that person's files

Neither of those are even close to what I said. I said that in the face of a motivated attacker, hard drive encryption is useless.

And that's your argument against having encryption enabled by default on mobile devices? That we should just let Jamal have access to all our files just because Vlad can do a mission impossible crack into our systems?

Windows, Mac: Because it increases support costs when retards lock themselves out of their machine with a forgotten password
Linux: Because it's your machine and you know what you do and don't need, the option's there if you want it.

This kind of black/white thinking is a symptom of autism m8.

"What's the point of being 99.99% secure? It's not 100% so it might as well be 0%"

It's dumb to assume on what is above the skies.
But it's dumber to try to step on the rights and control the life of others due your beliefs.

Jamal wouldn't even be able to remove the hard drive, much less read files off xfs.
>What's the point of being 99.99% secure?
More like 50% secure intead of 30% secure. Not a big difference.

>It's dumb to assume on what is above the skies.
Tell that to Hawkins.

>But it's dumber to try to step on the rights and control the life of others due your beliefs.
Helping others realize the errors of their ways is not "stepping on their rights", it's called "caring for them".

It is standard with iOS and (to my knowledge) Android.

Yeah, Jamal totally carries canisters of liquid nitrogen to stick RAM in for when he spots an unguarded laptop bag.

Talking and discussing is not taking control of the life of others.
But sending the cops to arrest em for not following the laws of your religion and digitally spying on em certainly is.

Most people don't give a shit about encrypting their files and enabling it by default is a performance loss that is not needed.

If you need it then you can easily do it. No reason to force it down people's throats.

>Jamal
See >liquid nitrogen
A totally ordinary canister of compressed air is more than enough.

>for not following the laws of your religion
Every society ever has moral laws.

>digitally spying on em
Funny, then, that the ones currently most ferociously in favor of digital spying are self-proclaimed atheists.

Yes, and that's not a good thing, except for the ones where it's actually proven to be a bad idea such as sister/brother marriage etc..

They're not actually atheists, as they believe in invisible spirits such as patriarchy and male privilege.

>that's not a good thing, except...
>except...
The laws you are "excepting" are just the ones you've brought up with to consider normal, as would just as well be the case in a religious society.

>They're not actually atheists, as they believe in invisible spirits such as patriarchy and male privilege.
If you're equating philosophy with religion -- which is not totally absurd -- everyone is religious.

Yes, and it is no problem.. until you want to force it on others.

It's not about "normal", it's about being something you can prove it's wrong.

>it's about being something you can prove it's wrong.
Many would argue that homosexuality is objectively wrong as well, though I'm sure you wouldn't agree. The "proofs" you require are highly complex when they're about societal phenomena. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but you're making issues far simpler than they actually are.

>until you want to force it on others.
Please show on the doll where the Spanish inquisitors touched you.

In other news, upholding a society requires some amount of shared values.

You can enable Bitlocker if pay $100 USD to microsoft, but people here dont like pay real money.

Wrong. Encryption of SSD are"How enable BIOS password in your device, please read this instructions "

Collage and work have enterprise versions so i can just plug it into one of those computers and enable bitlocker.I can pause encryption and continue on any win10/7+ PC even if it isnt on enterprise or pro. Other encrytion tools (Veracrypt, LUKS,etc) are too complex if want protect files. Bitlocker, just plug it in and type password.

The biggest problems are the fact you need Pro upgrade for enable Bitlocker There's a reason why this board is obsessed with Apple, AppleĀ“ encryption is a mandatory feature meanwhile Jow Forums doesn't respect Microsoft for pay the Pro upgrade

Attached: 1459834877430.gif (500x344, 947K)