From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rupesh Thakare Subject: Re: Shred mount option for ext4? Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:22:12 +0530 Message-ID: <456188DC.5030107@clusterfs.com> References: <8C7C41A176AC0B468BEFB2EFD9BDAB9902426639@XCH-NW-5V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andreas Dilger , Nikolai Joukov , Erik Mouw , Samuel Tardieu , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:6581 "EHLO mail.clusterfs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755784AbWKTKwT (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 05:52:19 -0500 To: "Wolber, Richard C" In-Reply-To: <8C7C41A176AC0B468BEFB2EFD9BDAB9902426639@XCH-NW-5V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Wolber, Richard C wrote: >> On Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:17 AM Andreas Dilger Wrote: >> >> Did anyone discuss doing this with crypto instead of actually >> overwriting the whole file? It would be pretty easy to store >> a per-file crypto key in each inode as an EA, then to >> "delete" the file all that would be needed would be to erase >> the key in a secure matter (which is a great deal easier >> because inodes don't move around on disk). >> > > If it's cheap to delete the keys, it's also cheap to harvest > the keys. A per file crypto-key lowers the barrier to entry. > That's true. But can't we combine the advantages of single-secure-key and per-file krypto key ? Can't we have a half single-secure-key combined with half per-file-krypto ? Key management overhead is not worse than that for single-secure-key. This gives offers same security with ease for shredding. Cheers, Rupesh > This is Schneier 101. > > > ..Chuck.. > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >