They work well in high security environments because you can allowlist the vendor and product id of only these hard drives, and you don't have to set up procedures where people HAVE to encrypt their drives before use.

So cost-wise it makes sense.

But for personal use? BitLocker / VeraCrypt all the way.

▲

chasd00 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You can probably implement your own these days. I would use a model to generate a requirement document, then human review, then generate an implementation plan, then human review, then take it to build. Have a different model to a code review and testing. End with human code review and testing.

You could make your own BitLocker conforming to your requirements without relying on or trusting any cloud or corporate entity.

	▲	fn-mote 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And then turn Mythos onto your code to make sure you don’t have vulnerabilities? That’s a lot of faith in the security of LLM-written code that I wouldn’t have in human-written code.

▲

lifeisloving 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

MS stores your Bitlocker keys on Microsoft servers now if you ever login with a OneDrive account, at least they were.

And MS has handed those keys over to law enforcement before.

▲

caymanjim 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's how it works by default, but you don't have to use it that way. BitLocker can be used securely.

	▲	ByteOfWood 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You should not be trusting a company or product that has been known to give up keys, regardless of how you are using it. Too risky

▲

InvisibleUp an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I suppose it works if your threat model is corporate espionage and not state actors.