On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:37:25PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> (Are you really using ACLS? It would be interesting if you posted a
> note about what you are doing, how, why, and how well it works.)
Thanks for above clarifications. I have not used bup till now. We were
mainly comparing bup+cgd wit
Mayuresh writes:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 07:53:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> One could use sysutils/bup for this, or one of the bup followon programs
>
> bup seems a very good tool to me. I have used duplicity before and find
> bup to be a lot simpler than it.
>
> But a few notes on the bu
Mayuresh writes:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 07:53:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Comparing encfs to cgd, the big issues are
>>
>> - stability of codebase to be able to get your bits back much later (?,
>>but cgd seems like it has been quite stable. But it's NetBSD only
>>AFAIK.)
>>
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 07:53:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> One could use sysutils/bup for this, or one of the bup followon programs
bup seems a very good tool to me. I have used duplicity before and find
bup to be a lot simpler than it.
But a few notes on the bup web page[1] intrigue me, name
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 07:53:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> Comparing encfs to cgd, the big issues are
>
> - stability of codebase to be able to get your bits back much later (?,
>but cgd seems like it has been quite stable. But it's NetBSD only
>AFAIK.)
>
> - exposing the structure
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 07:53:35PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> - exposing the structure of your filesystem such as the histogram of
>file sizes, directory organization, and when various parts were
>updated (cgd wins)
There is a sibling of encfs - cryfs, which while being similar in many
o
Mayuresh writes:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:32:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> > - Can the native cgd of NetBSD be used for the purpose of encrypted
>> > backup? Basically can I mount such filesystem in a way that it shows
>> > encrypted files?
>>
>> I use cgd(4) devices for encryp
swiftgri...@gmail.com (Swift Griggs) writes:
>Anyhow, based on my bad experience, I wouldn't recommend iSCSI for anyone
>unless they simply had no other choice. I have seen it be workable,
>especially with dedicated hardware (Equallogic gear seems to work okay,
>and it's got NetBSD bits in ther
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Mayuresh wrote:
Just curious. How does iscsi compare with NFS? Guess even NFS has a
notion of block size, that would help optimize io.
Sorry for butting in, but I'd point out that NFS is file-based and layers
on top of an existing filesystem. So, the block size of the unde
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:31:14AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> No, just an iscssi device. Many NAS devices can export a "partition" via
> iscssi.
Just curious. How does iscsi compare with NFS? Guess even NFS has a notion
of block size, that would help optimize io.
Mayuresh.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, Michael van Elst wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:32:18AM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 04:23:08AM -, Michael van Elst wrote:
An ISCSI target on the other hand doesn't require any privileges if
you just export a file as a disk image.
I mean, even to
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:32:18AM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 04:23:08AM -, Michael van Elst wrote:
> > An ISCSI target on the other hand doesn't require any privileges if
> > you just export a file as a disk image.
>
> I mean, even to export it once from the target side,
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 04:23:08AM -, Michael van Elst wrote:
> An ISCSI target on the other hand doesn't require any privileges if
> you just export a file as a disk image.
I mean, even to export it once from the target side, you'd need root. No?
If not, can you please provide more details su
mayur...@acm.org (Mayuresh) writes:
>I think creating iscssi device would need root.
>I searched for user space iscssi, but couldn't get much concrete
>information.
An ISCSI initiator attaches device drivers, and that usually requires
root permission.
An ISCSI target on the other hand doesn't r
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:31:14AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:19:33PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> > That's quite interesting. Would like to try out. But I guess, you'd need
> > root access at remote? No?
>
> No, just an iscssi device. Many NAS devices can export a "par
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:19:33PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> That's quite interesting. Would like to try out. But I guess, you'd need
> root access at remote? No?
No, just an iscssi device. Many NAS devices can export a "partition" via
iscssi.
Martin
On 06/12/17 15:46, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
[---]
> I'm thinking about reuploading block device image for each change. I
> noted in the past that people were trying to do the same with TrueCrypt,
> and they give up - it's good for one-time upload of something, but it's
> not usable in scenarios that
On 12.06.2017 15:03, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:55:48PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> On 12.06.2017 14:45, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:41:56PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
You would need to push large part image of an encryp
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:55:48PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 12.06.2017 14:45, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:41:56PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >>
> >> You would need to push large part image of an encrypted volume for every
> >> change to files.
> >
> >
On 12.06.2017 14:45, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:41:56PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>
>> You would need to push large part image of an encrypted volume for every
>> change to files.
>
> That doesn't make sense to me. Why would you need to push more blocks
> than a
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:41:56PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>
> You would need to push large part image of an encrypted volume for every
> change to files.
That doesn't make sense to me. Why would you need to push more blocks
than actually changed?
--
Thor Lancelot Simon
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 07:51:00AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 09:59:17PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:12:58PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > > I have used cgd for remote encrypted backups in the past:
> > >
> > > - remote offers a "partitio
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 09:59:17PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:12:58PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > I have used cgd for remote encrypted backups in the past:
> >
> > - remote offers a "partition" as iscsi device
>
> Not over network, such as cloud backup, right?
The
On 11.06.2017 18:26, Mayuresh wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:16:50PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>> Ok, you mean, I can mount it such that it shows encrypted files?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, use cgdconfig(8).
>
> It won't really show files in encrypted form, I guess.
>
You need to create a regular
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:12:58PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> I have used cgd for remote encrypted backups in the past:
>
> - remote offers a "partition" as iscsi device
Not over network, such as cloud backup, right?
encfs/cryfs like approach shows the encrypted directory which can be
back
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 06:16:50PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > Ok, you mean, I can mount it such that it shows encrypted files?
> >
>
> Yes, use cgdconfig(8).
It won't really show files in encrypted form, I guess.
> Putting image of encrypted partition to cloud sounds less trivial. You
>
On 11.06.2017 17:57, Mayuresh wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:32:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>> - Can the native cgd of NetBSD be used for the purpose of encrypted
>>> backup? Basically can I mount such filesystem in a way that it shows
>>> encrypted files?
>>>
>>
>> I use cgd(4) d
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 09:27:25PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:32:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > > - Can the native cgd of NetBSD be used for the purpose of encrypted
> > > backup? Basically can I mount such filesystem in a way that it shows
> > > encrypted file
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:32:02PM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > - Can the native cgd of NetBSD be used for the purpose of encrypted
> > backup? Basically can I mount such filesystem in a way that it shows
> > encrypted files?
> >
>
> I use cgd(4) devices for encrypted backup.
Ok, you m
On 11.06.2017 16:22, Mayuresh wrote:
> I am coming from encfs/cryfs on Linux, which allow encryption at directory
> level. A user space mount shows the unencrypted contents, while the
> physical disk has encrypted contents, which can be easily backed up.
>
> encfs on NetBSD seems broken and dated
I am coming from encfs/cryfs on Linux, which allow encryption at directory
level. A user space mount shows the unencrypted contents, while the
physical disk has encrypted contents, which can be easily backed up.
encfs on NetBSD seems broken and dated to me, while cryfs doesn't seem to
be available
31 matches
Mail list logo
