From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755201AbcAHRmo (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:42:44 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:35405 "EHLO mail-wm0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755111AbcAHRmm (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:42:42 -0500 From: Nicolai Stange To: David Niklas Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why do we need encryption in the fs? References: <20160101120531.0957e02f@ulgy_thing> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:42:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20160101120531.0957e02f@ulgy_thing> (David Niklas's message of "Fri, 1 Jan 2016 12:05:31 -0500") Message-ID: <87lh80hss0.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Niklas writes: > I'm curious as to why fs'es such as ext4 need encryption in the fs, > It seems to me that we've got great support for it in tools such as > cryptsetup. > Point me to the fine manuals, I'm sure they exist. https://lwn.net/Articles/639427/ Make sure to have a look at the comments below the main article. > Why not have encryption in the fs you ask, arguments against include the > inability to use recovery tools, like photorec and that backups are more > difficult this way.