CryptoHeaven Available For Mac OS X 20
Mark0 writes "In an article on MacCentral we read 'CryptoHeaven beefs up Mac OS X support'. This is great news for the Mac OS X community as there aren't many competing applications for the new platform. CryptoHeaven seems to be leading the secure email sector and also provides instant messaging and file storage!" You can never have too much security! Well, OK, you can, but CryptoHeaven looks kinda neat.
An excellent product (Score:2, Informative)
I believe there's a huge market for a product like this.
On another note, doing some research, I found that there were several interesting ways of achieving secure e-mail connections in OS X [allpar.com].
Another option... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Another option... (Score:4, Informative)
Or you can just use Apple's Disk Copy to create AES-encrypted and password-protected disk volumes. Just be sure not to put the password in your Keychain (it's selected to do that by default when it prompts for a password at mount). It's free and already installed with MacOS X.
Re:Another option... (Score:2)
Right, because if you put it in your keychain, then its only protected by an easy to guess single password, right?
Has anyone tried making the keychain itself better protected? (Say, putting IT on an AES partition) or putting it on a removable USB keychain drive?
(And then encrypting it with PGP or something.)
I've considered doing this, but haven't had a chance to experiment -- I wonder if OS X can handle the keychain being somewhere other than ~/Library/Keychain, like
Re:Another option... (Score:1)
for exampleThis encrypts (e) the file to me (r "receiver", specified by the email address) and saves it in ascii text format (a). Later if I want to decrypt (d) the file:(then enter passphrase)
pretty simple
as for a GUI solution...? I think it would be simple to make some system services or applescripts or something to wrap that functionality, but i dunno
Re:Another option... (Score:1)
A framework is a lot easier to manage especially since I can put it in my own ~/Library/Frameworks/
Re:Another option... (Score:2)
There is a GPGME Framework (GPGME being the preferred way to access the functionality of GPG).
Point your browser to http://macgpg.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] and download the GPGME.Framework.
Re:Another option... (Score:1)
So it's just a shim? That defeats the whole point |-p
Also, when the hell is GPG going to use CDSA, multiple keychains suck
Re:Another option... (Score:2)
It's supposed to be a shim. It provides all the APIs and everything you'd want (encryption, decryption, signing, signature verification and key management) and the engine (being GPG) could easily be swapped out for something else. If you don't like it though, take it up with Werner. The argument of whether or not the functions should be directly accessible via a library have been argued to death in the various newsgroups/mailing lists...
Re:Another option... (Score:1)
OS X has a trust framework which ought to be used or else it's just a 5th wheel. If I wanted Linux chaos I would use it.
I've had it for a week now... (Score:4, Informative)
File transfer/encryption is a one click process, my only complaint is that I only get 2MB of storage for free... you can pay for more though
Re:I've had it for a week now... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know if this is true or not. I know that the proper amount of security is such that the expense of breaking the encryption is greater than the value of the message for every point in the future. This doesn't have an upper bound. The only factor that comes into play is convenience of the security procedures. Too much security sometimes relates to an inconvenient policies.
Subscription costs! (Score:1, Insightful)
And what will I do with all my secure data once Cryptoheaven dot bombs itself?