Tails on VM?

Is Tails just as secure on a VM as it is on a physical machine?

Gonna give you my 2 cents. By secure you mean protecting your files? Using it on a VM maybe better.If all your important files(work-college-financial stuff) is kept on the host if the VM gets infected you're secure.But be careful even VMs are not 100% secure,some malware can make their way from the VM to the host.In the end of the day being careful with what you download is better.

a lot of people get caught because of metadata. like your screen res, general location, web browser version, video card.. a vm could obfuscate this stuff maybe better.

>>13841 I thought Tails on VM was a no no... Can leak from the host... infact does it not give a warning when you boot in a VM about this? (too lazy to test now)

>>13851 Fuck it I did test, and it does give warning... Don't VM Tails if you are serious about OppSec...

>>13841 >>13851 >>13853 https://tails.boum.org/doc/advanced_topics/virtualization/index.en.html#index1h1

>>13841 this is vaguely related but how secure is raid 0? what I mean is say I had secure files on two usb's in raid 0 and someone got one of them. what would they be able to recover?

>>13934 I don't think raid 0 is in any way recoverable from single drive fail? What data is on the drive I suspect is dependent on the stripe size, chunks of ???64kb??? might well still exist in a recoverable way - but it would be luck if a single file made it or not - and definatly no large files... although maybe data could be compaired to existing files to see if parts are the same and hence fill in gaps... i.e. NSA still gonna get you!

>>13940 Interesting, I knew it wasn't recoverable but I wasn't sure if it was empty the recycle bin "non recoverable". I suppose it's just something to consider adding on top of real encryption and protection.

>>13943 losing a single drive from raid 0 is way more problematic than empty recycle bin... even for the NSA - they might gleen small things but on the whole your data is gone!

>>13948 Can you raid your raid 0s to add redundancy in case of accidents?

>>13952 yes - its called raid 0+1 2 sets of raid 0 backing each other up. any 1 drive of 4 can fail - a select 2 drives can fail. As opposed to raid 10 which is 2 sets of raid 1, then striped to make it into a raid 0 config from the 2 raid 1s'.

>>13958 >>13952 you cant just have a hot spare for use in raid 0, it wont know which drive is gonna need backing up until its too late.