From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TAZS1sl7RayX for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:11:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:11:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fulvetta.riseup.net (fulvetta-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46CC0593AE for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <517AB15F.6090201@riseup.net> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 13:54:55 -0300 From: Hugo MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <51792BC6.7030602@riseup.net> <20130426141405.GA3188@tansi.org> In-Reply-To: <20130426141405.GA3188@tansi.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] not a valid LUKS device List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de On 04/26/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Wagner wrote: >> What is your opinion on this? > > Well, it is difficult to see what this bug really does, but > if it really overwrites the first sector, then the salts > in the LUKS header are gone and there is no way to recover > from that without a header backup. Sure, as expected. I will reformat that so.. :( > > It seems Ubuntu still does not understand how to keep its > fingers off existing LUKS partitions. I recommend you complain > to them. I am trying.. But as I understand, it is seen by them as low priority and who is interested in things out of the mainstream should achieve by themselves. Thanks Arno! > > Arno >