Re: Looking for confirmation as I enter the acceptance stage.

[blobfish <blobfish@gmx.com>]

On Monday, July 24, 2023 2:17:28 PM EDT Michael Kjörling wrote:
> 
> This doesn't _have_ to be a showstopper; it's possible that LUKS
> simply needs data that's outside of what you've sent, or maybe you've
> been using that file differently. (And please think thrice before
> sending more; remember, anyone who has a valid key slot passphrase to
> a header has access to the plain text data of the container if they
> can get their hands on the ciphertext data, and this mailing list _is_
> publicly archived. Absolutely do consider that key file compromised,
> possibly alongside your other, memorized passphrase for the
> container.) But it's somewhat of a downer.
> 
> I would still say you have some chance when doing it with more data,
> though, so what I suggested previously is absolutely still worth
> trying. After all, the extraction I did left only 19823 bytes
> including the header signature at the start, which is plenty less than
> the canonical size of the full LUKS 1 header.

I assumed the key file was compromised  as I sent it along with the mail. I am 
a little disappointed about my passphrase as I have committed it to memory and 
haven't used it for anything else. Oh well.

I have plans on getting another hard drive this afternoon and starting the 
cloning process. 8TB drive, so going to take a while. After that I was going 
to get back into your procedure. I will probably need some more hand holding, 
so I will post back when all that is done.

Thanks.