<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Encryption on VisorCraft News</title><link>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/tags/encryption/</link><description>Recent content in Encryption on VisorCraft News</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2026 08:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.visorcraft.com/news/tags/encryption/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Encrypted at Rest by Default: MongrelDB and Roamarr</title><link>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/2026/09/encrypted-at-rest-by-default-mongreldb-and-roamarr/</link><pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2026 08:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/2026/09/encrypted-at-rest-by-default-mongreldb-and-roamarr/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;ldquo;Encrypted at rest&amp;rdquo; is one of those phrases that shows up on feature checklists and means anywhere from &amp;ldquo;the disk is LUKS&amp;rsquo;d, which the hosting provider did, not us&amp;rdquo; to &amp;ldquo;every byte your data touches on its way to stable storage goes through an authenticated cipher,&amp;rdquo; and the distance between those two readings is where most of the actual security lives. We ship two products that store sensitive things, MongrelDB as the database and Roamarr as the travel organizer that sits on top of it, and both encrypt at rest with defaults the user never has to configure beyond one secret, which sounds like marketing until you look at what the defaults actually cover, because the interesting question was never whether to encrypt, it was which files people forget about when they say a database is encrypted.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>