On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 21:59 +0100, Ian Pascoe wrote:
Gents
Thanks for the responses - I really was trying to find out if, for any
hardware or software reason, a usre could no longer access their encrypted
files, if a user with appropriate privilages could. Not looking at this in
the
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 10:13 +0100, Neil Greenwood wrote:
2008/10/3 Ian Pascoe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Evening all
A quick question on how the forthcoming encryption will work.
Can it be set up to allow root to access the encrypted files as well as the
legitimate owner?
Ian
Hi Ian,
2008/10/3 Ian Pascoe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Evening all
A quick question on how the forthcoming encryption will work.
Can it be set up to allow root to access the encrypted files as well as the
legitimate owner?
Ian
Hi Ian,
I don't know the details of the proposal yet, but I seem to recall
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 12:15 +0100, James Westby wrote:
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 10:13 +0100, Neil Greenwood wrote:
2008/10/3 Ian Pascoe [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Evening all
A quick question on how the forthcoming encryption will work.
Can it be set up to allow root to access the encrypted
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 19:41 +0100, Chris Coulson wrote:
The root user will still be able to read files if the user is logged
in,
because the private folder will be mounted.
Hi Chris,
That's very true. Thanks for pointing it out.
Would an apparmor profile be able to prevent root from reading
2008/10/5 James Westby [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 19:41 +0100, Chris Coulson wrote:
The root user will still be able to read files if the user is logged
in,
because the private folder will be mounted.
Hi Chris,
That's very true. Thanks for pointing it out.
Would an apparmor
