https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/06/adobe-premiere-cc/

Itoddlers BTFO

based polish people

but apparently thats pretty much copy and paste from AMDs own benchmarks

so realworld tests still keep us waiting

Link to article?

Is it possible to determine, when a LUKS encrypted system has been successfully decrypted and booted the last time, if you are unable to decrypt it yourself?

The question in essence is: if you have two encrypted Linux systems installed on two SSDs and you are asked to hand over the decryption keys by the authorities, can you give the password of one of them to the authorities, and plausibly deny to remember the other one because "its an old system that I haven't used in a long time"?

as long as all log files are within encrypted container.. i doubt ?

mm actualy probly depens on system

if Grub2/uefi/whateverbootmanager is a snitch and keeps logs

then yes @Deleted User

but boot managereless login ??should not ?? write logs to anywhere but inside the containers once you have given password

but if you need such deniability, you better of using something else than luks

such scenarios are when the "destroy on password2" bundled with "destroy if copied" step in

later needing quite bit tinkering with the controller board of hdd

this is why you never store anything of negative value on your computers

I am not storing anything that incriminating but wouldn't that be even less plausible to deny?

They can inspect the broken hard drive and figure out

yes but they would not have any proof

only that you had such setup there

And that you deliberately gave password 2 which hindered investigations

Which would bring you right into even more trouble

not really no

you just make the password2 = password2

or 1234

or your wifes name

when they try to passguess they end up destroying it themself

you had nothing to do with it at that point

as always you have right to be silent

and you should use that right

also right to drink,wc,lawyer up fast as possible

you should know this by now :3

everything you say can be and WILL BE used AGAINST you.

I don't understand how that can be less incriminating than partially collaborating and saying that you forgot the old one because you never used it

cause if/when they do get inside

its clear you lied

and your punishment will be more severe

speaking can only make your situation worse