Return-Path: Received: from v6.tansi.org (ns.km31936-01.keymachine.de [87.118.116.4]) by mail.server123.net (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 08:26:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from gatewagner.dyndns.org (77-57-49-177.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.57.49.177]) by v6.tansi.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EBEF320DC238 for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2014 08:26:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 08:26:39 +0100 From: Arno Wagner Message-ID: <20141231072639.GA304@tansi.org> References: <549E63FE.8020602@gmx.net> <20141227101133.GA21707@tansi.org> <54A1A63D.5060604@gmx.net> <54A1AB87.1070804@yahoo.com> <54A20EDA.9030400@gmx.net> <20141230100413.GA11208@tansi.org> <54A2EC7E.7030201@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54A2EC7E.7030201@gmx.net> Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Asustor NAS and cryptsetup 1.6.1 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de ecryptfs leaks a lot of data like filenames, sizes, modifiaction times, etc. These can be critical. For example, sometimes file-sizes are misused as "fingerprints". I would say definitely backwards security-wise, for possibly some better usability. Arno On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 19:18:38 CET, msalists@gmx.net wrote: > They are reluctant to give out any details, but are saying that they > will be releasing a new version of their software in the coming > weeks that uses ecryptfs instead. > Is this a step forward or backward (or rather just "sideways")? > > Mark > > On 2014-12-30 02:04, Arno Wagner wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 03:32:58 CET, msalists@gmx.net wrote: > >>On 2014-12-29 11:29, Quentin Lefebvre wrote: > >>>On 29/12/2014 20:06, msalists@gmx.net wrote : > >>>>Assuming I did create the container with aes-cbc-essiv:sha256; would > >>>>cryptsetup automatically figure out the correct parameters when it is > >>>>subsequently called without those parameters to mount the container? > >>>>Or do non-default parameters at creation time require the same > >>>>non-default parameters again for subsequent mounts? > >>>As you may have understood, in plain mode, there is no header, so > >>>no way for cryptsetup to guess the algorithm used. Thus, if it is > >>>a non-default one, it must be specified also at mount time. > >>> > >>Hm, makes sense. Is there some kind of a config file that I could > >>specify the parameters in, and that would be read prior to using the > >>defaults - similar to how some parameters for mount can be specified > >>in /etc/fstab ? > >Only if the NAS-makers added one. cryptsetup does not have > >a mechanism for this. > > > >Arno > > _______________________________________________ > dm-crypt mailing list > dm-crypt@saout.de > http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: arno@wagner.name GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718 ---- A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -- Plato If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier