So what are the advantages of using SiriKali vs. something like Veracrypt. They both essentially do the same thing correct. I assume Veracrypt would be more secure. What are the differences between the two. I know they use different encryption methods, but wouldn't you just always want to use the one that is more secure. Encryption times? I'm guessing that SiriKali is just a GUI to manage different types of encrypted files?
Asked
Active
Viewed 183 times
1
-
*"I'm guessing that SiriKali is just a GUI to manage different types of encrypted files?"* - no need to guess here. That's actually clear from the very first sentence on the [SiriKali homepage](https://mhogomchungu.github.io/sirikali/): *SiriKali is a Qt/C++ GUI application that manages ecryptfs, cryfs, encfs, gocryptfs, fscrypt and securefs based encrypted folders. "*. – Steffen Ullrich Jan 15 '22 at 06:25
1 Answers
1
SiriKali is a front-end for various folder based encryption implementations while Veracrypt is an actual implementation of full disk encryption.
So you are trying to compare here encryption front-end vs. encryption implementation - which makes no sense. If you just look at the encryption you are comparing various implementations vs. a single implementation, which isn't that practical either.
On a conceptual level you compare file based encryption vs. full disk encryption. There are already many similar questions here, so there is no need to repeat it here. See instead:
- Full disk encryption vs home folder encryption - why should the former be chosen over the latter
- Does File-Based Encryption offer comparable security to Full-Disk Encryption on Android?
- Disk Encryption vs File Encryption for Embedded Linux?
- Which is more secure a full disk or file encryption?
See also Wikipedia:Disk encryption | Disk encryption vs. filesystem-level encryption about this topic.
Steffen Ullrich
- 184,332
- 29
- 363
- 424