1998-12-11 - Re: Linux Encrypted File Sytem

Header Data

From: joel boutros <jdb@layer8.net>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ce5883fdee63247e5a3b71391588b62d819f692456e07678bbe0cd637af06c76
Message ID: <19981211150128.A9434@layer8.net>
Reply To: <XFMail.981211124103.mikeg@soonernet.com>
UTC Datetime: 1998-12-11 23:53:06 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 07:53:06 +0800

Raw message

From: joel boutros <jdb@layer8.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 07:53:06 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Linux Encrypted File Sytem
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.981211124103.mikeg@soonernet.com>
Message-ID: <19981211150128.A9434@layer8.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Fri, Dec 11, 1998 at 01:45:55PM -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> Did you try CFS? It does not require any patches to the kernel or 
> the mount program.

CFS encrypts files and directory names individually, rather than
filesystems as a whole, allowing the user to infer directory structure
by examining the encrypted store.  It also does really badly if you
expect to use it with more than one user.

In addition, the documentation (last I looked) pretty clearly says
not to use it in a multiuser environment.

TCFS makes extensions upon CFS.  I don't know how well it does, though,
or whether it fixes the problems listed above.  I've only heard it
described in the context of a suggested alternative.

There are apparently several others, whose names I don't know,
unfortunately.  I've not looked at them.

- joel "No real content, just a comment or two"

> 
> igor
> 
> Mike Gorsuch wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Hey guys,
> > 
> > I'm hoping that you guys can point me in the right direction.  I have become
> > very interested in the idea of an encrypted file system, rather than encrypting
> > individual files.  I read an article in the Linux Journal that talked about how
> > to give Linux the support.  Well, first I had to get the source for an older
> > kernel, 2.0.30, and use the patches.  It patched and compiled fine. Next I was
> > supposed to patch mount.  The problem I am facing is that the mount source will
> > not take the patch right.  
> > 
> > If anyone can help me on these two issues I would be very happy:
> > 
> > 1) What source version of mount do I need to use?
> > 
> > 2) Is there a way to get kernel 2.0.35 or later to use this support?
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "The Darkest Hour is Always Just Before Dawn..."
> > 
> > Mike Gorsuch
> > aka Wulfgang
> > ICQ UIN 670820
> > email: mikeg@soonernet.com
> > Web Page: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/6071
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 	- Igor.





Thread