When travelling away from home (i.e. when not using my own computer) I boot Tails from a USB and have any sensitive information kept in the Persistent Storage.
By ‘sensitive information’ I am referring to bookmarks, stored passwords, account information, etc. – I am not referring to illegal material, large swathes of cryptocurrency or the secret recipe for Frogbank. That is to say: my threat model isn’t Assange/Snowden‐tier, though I’d still like a reasonably strong level of security when using public devices.
Tails works… passably, but I’m far more comfortable using Arch and I like having persistent UI settings, shortcuts, configurations, etc.
I understand that all of this is possible in Tails with scripts, but it’s not perfect, very clunky and, if ultimately securely feasible, I’d just like to use Arch – and so here’s what I’d like to know:
What is the (meaningful) difference between a LUKS‐encrypted Arch session booted from an external USB, and a Tails session booted from an external USB of which the Persistent Storage is also LUKS‐encrypted? I understand that Tails uses Tor, however I can also run Tor within an Arch boot if necessary.
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding the purpose of Tails, and that it’s designed for those who aren’t particularly technically knowledgeable ‐ but I honestly can’t identify a (meaningful) difference.
Both are vulnerable to peripheral‐compromised keyloggers, does Tails protect against, say, clipboard data interception which naked Arch lacks, perhaps?
I understand the likely response will be: “just use Tails, why complicate things”, all the same I’d still like to know (if only for technical curiosity and learning) what the actual difference is.
Thank you for reading.