On 2014-12-19 00:57, John Andersen wrote:
On 12/18/2014 09:57 AM, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote:
On Thursday 18 December 2014 11:00:52 Anton Aylward wrote:
Ok, I was able to install the system with encrypted ext4, then rsynced /home to backup folder, created btrfs on top of dm-0 device, rsynced backed up data back, changed fstab. Everything works as expected, now trying to do some simple file operations just to see if it will suddenly fail or something like that...
Reminds me of a flight out of Alaska in the dead of winter in perfectly horrible weather. The Flight was canceled at the last minute, and many were disappointed. When asked why the flight couldn't squeak out during a lull in the storm, the clerk at the flight window said, "If the pilot is afraid to fly in this weather, why in gods name would you want to go?"
If Opensuse, with all their expertise doesn't trust encrypted BTRFS, why should I?
LOL. But I think you have a confusion regarding this issue. What the devs are afraid of is btrfs native encryption, and that is what is discouraged and disabled. Now, the yast partitioner module has had encryption support for years. This time they added support for this new feature of btrfs internal encryption, but did not add the possibility of choosing traditional encryption instead. Ie, two methods. At some times the powers that be decide that btrfs internal encryption is unsafe and disable it. So the yast devs disable it. But they fail to re-enable classic (LUKS) encription for btrfs! Not because it may be dangerous, which as far as we know it is not, but because they neglected/forgot to do it. This traditional method is what Stanislav did. Nobody has claimed that it is unsafe, to my knowledge. It is the new method, internal btrfs encryption, which has been disabled. Completely different beast. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)