Re: [dm-crypt] cryptsetup versions: cryptsetup 2.3.4 vs. cryptsetup 2.1.0 - thought I had data corruption!?!

["Michael Kjörling" <michael@kjorling.se>]

On 25 Nov 2020 18:30 +0100, from mjoerg@gmail.com (Martin Jørgensen):
> I tried to look in version history but am not into the details of the
> difference in crypt-setup versions. Can anyone please tell why I got/get
> this error using 2.1.0 and not with 2.3.4?
> 
> "mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/mapper/....,
> missing codepage or helper program, or other error

_If_ you're able to unlock the container using both versions, _but_
with one you are able to mount the file system within the container
and with the other you are unable to do so, then I would suggest
comparing the output of `file -s /dev/mapper/whatever` for the two
cases after unlocking. You could also try `cryptsetup luksDump
--dump-master-key` for each version of cryptsetup and comparing the
output, but be sure that you understand the consequences of the master
key being potentially compromised before you do so.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I am
_fairly_ certain that there is nothing in the luksOpen/luksClose code
that will change anything in the LUKS header, so something else must
be going on in your case.

Are you able to reproduce the behavior with a brand new container?
(You can use a plain file to hold a LUKS container.) If so, please
list the exact commands, in order, and the exact software versions
(kernel, cryptsetup, libcryptsetup) involved.

-- 
Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael@kjorling.se
 “Remember when, on the Internet, nobody cared that you were a dog?”