Gabriel Ambuehl writes: >On Friday 23 March 2007 18:01:09 Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >> >~/file1 >> >and ~/encrypted/file2 >> >seems a lot easier to implement AND use to me... >> >> Implement, yes (since it's already been done). Use? I don't think >> so. > >You can actually use it right now, with almost every app (except for those >broken enough to use hardcoded filenames), without any hacking. Most of the >neat features mentioned above are app level anyhow which is very well >possible... > >Now, for a (IMHO) truly useful extension: find a way to cache writes and >encrypt them with a public key so that creating new files (for example >because you just received a SMS) can work while the phone is locked. Once the >phone is unlocked, decrypt the data and store it in the encrypted FS.
I'll need a phone to explore that... >Maybe it's just me, but pefs seems vastly over engineered. Which is generally >a bad thing when it comes to encryption... Hmmm... I don't see a lot of over-engineering there; just what's needed to support the use case that best matches my intuition of what a user will find most straightforward (well, OK, allowing keys other than a single password, maybe). But then, as the guy who wrote the description, I wouldn't be likely to. Beyond that, I think we're at a real YMMV point; what I see as the most straightforward approach for a user is something you see as too much work to implement for not much (if any) benefit; what you see as a straightforward way to work and an easy interface for a user I see as awkward. And since we're both spouting opinions, there's no way to do a real comparison without a prototype. _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
