From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cp-out12.libero.it (cp-out12.libero.it [212.52.84.112]) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:43:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.83.0.4] (151.49.187.253) by cp-out12.libero.it (8.5.107) id 4A9203FC02315CBB for dm-crypt@saout.de; Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:43:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4A9E4C4D.3020701@tiscali.it> Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:43:25 +0200 From: Tommaso MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4A9B01E1.5030205@tiscali.it> <20090901011335.GC22049@resivo.wgnet.de> <4A9CE6B0.1070702@tiscali.it> <20090901093425.GD6333@resivo.wgnet.de> In-Reply-To: <20090901093425.GD6333@resivo.wgnet.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Help: after crypttab modify > begin: waiting for root file system Reply-To: elisapippo@tiscali.it List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de Jonas Meurer wrote: > yes, that's exactly what passdev is meant for. Problem solved indeed, passdev works :) > that really sounds weird. if the unlocked device _is_ the same for both > passphrases, then it will behave similar. thus i don't see how issues > with network should be related to the used keyslot. Ok, maybe I got it, but maybe you won't like the answer. The error I was getting with the new passphrase was: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready I found many topics about, and I discovered that this is an issue of a bad renaming of the network interfaces, see i.e. http://marc.info/?l=debian-user&m=114369893509924&w=2 In fact I have two NICs on the server, one of which (eth0) is not used (hasn't got even a cable). So it seems that, due to the dynamic remapping of the interfaces at boot, if I insert the old passphrase the interface names are right, but if I change the passphrase, probably because of some kind of variation in the entropy pattern of the system, the names are swapped. I solved this issue installing ifrename and managing the interfaces name according to their MAC. HOWEVER: if this is the case (that is, if the cause of the name swapping is due to the passphrase inserted for cryptsetup), I believe it's not a good thing. It would indicate some kind of fixed entropy pattern variation according to a given passphrase, probably not a desiderable behaviour in regard to the security of encrypted filesystems. I also addressed this issue on http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=44690 Thank you :)