On Fri, Aug 27, 1999 at 11:21:50PM +0100, Antonomasia wrote:
> Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I'm under the impression that CFS uses inode numbers to compute an
> > IV. If you restore the ciphertext from backups the inode numbers will
> > probably be different and the files will not decrypt properly.
>
> Seems not. I think the dangling symlinks do the IV.
You're right. I wonder when that was added. The first time I
configured CFS (I think it was version 1.1.something) I read the docs
and was left thinking that inode numbers had to be preserved for
proper decryption.
My little experiment works as I described it, even on version
1.3.3.1. I didn't copy the .pvect_* symlink and apparently the
software reverted back to using the inode information, thus the ln
worked while the cp didn't. I'm guessing this is for backwards
compatibility.
So the bottom line seems to be that it's version-dependent. As long as
the .pvect_* dangling symlinks get backed up along with the ciphertext
files things are in good shape, unless your CFS is too old to create
those symlinks in the first place.
