EXT4 fscrypt vs. eCryptfs vs. LUKS dm-crypt Benchmarks
Written by Michael Larabel in Storage on 14 June 2018. Page 3 of 3. 5 Comments

Under CompileBench, the LUKS-based full volume encryption was on par with the unencrypted results followed by fscrypt and then eCryptfs.

For those curious how the EXT4-based file-encryption affects build time performance... LUKS continued to do the best while EXT4 fscrypt was the slowest.

The CPU usage for the fscrypt-based encryption was also noticeably higher on average.

While if planning to run an NGINX HTTP web server from an encrypted setup, eCryptfs was the only lagger.

Under the OSBench test, eCryptfs was much slower than fscrypt and dm-crypt.

If you enjoyed this article consider joining Phoronix Premium to view this site ad-free, multi-page articles on a single page, and other benefits. PayPal tips are also graciously accepted. Thanks for your support.

Related Articles
About The Author
Author picture

Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience. Michael has written more than 20,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated benchmarking software. He can be followed via Twitter or contacted via MichaelLarabel.com.

Trending Linux News