Re: EncFS
Thus spake cypherpunk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 18:48]: : A remailer posted about EncFS. Gerow quoted the first paragraph and : added the criticism that it doesn't do locking. Dixon saw the quoted : first paragraph, which said that the link to the program was below. : And indeed, it was below, in the first message from the remailer. It : included this link, http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html. But Dixon : apparently didn't understand the notion of quoting partial messages in : a mailing list conversation. He just saw the part about the link being : below, and in Gerow's message there was no such link. So he : complained: there was nothing below. But Gerow misunderstood, he : though Dixon was commenting about EncFS's locking mechanisms. So Gerow : responded as below, adding to the confusion. In my defense, I assumed a baseline of understanding when it comes to public lists. The last thing I expected was him to quote /me/ and complain about something that someone /else/ had said, when it was all painfully obvious from the first message. I guess I just won't assume that around here anymore. : Honestly, I don't know how you people generate enough brain power to : keep yourselves alive. Breathing comes automatically. No thought required.
Re: EncFS
A remailer posted about EncFS. Gerow quoted the first paragraph and added the criticism that it doesn't do locking. Dixon saw the quoted first paragraph, which said that the link to the program was below. And indeed, it was below, in the first message from the remailer. It included this link, http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html. But Dixon apparently didn't understand the notion of quoting partial messages in a mailing list conversation. He just saw the part about the link being below, and in Gerow's message there was no such link. So he complained: there was nothing below. But Gerow misunderstood, he though Dixon was commenting about EncFS's locking mechanisms. So Gerow responded as below, adding to the confusion. Honestly, I don't know how you people generate enough brain power to keep yourselves alive. CP On 4/28/05, Damian Gerow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thus spake Jim Dixon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 09:41]: : It also doesn't do locking. : : There was nothing below. Someone I know just tried it out three days ago. He said it flat-out didn't 'lock' the files properly. It's got nothing to do with having something below.
Re: EncFS
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Damian Gerow wrote: Thus spake Userbeam Remailer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27/04/05 02:33]: : EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without : any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel : module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to : source and binary releases below. It also doesn't do locking. There was nothing below. -- Jim Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel +44 117 982 0786 mobile +44 797 373 7881 http://xlattice.sourceforge.net p2p communications infrastructure
Re: EncFS
Thus spake Jim Dixon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 09:41]: : It also doesn't do locking. : : There was nothing below. Someone I know just tried it out three days ago. He said it flat-out didn't 'lock' the files properly. It's got nothing to do with having something below.
Re: EncFS
A remailer posted about EncFS. Gerow quoted the first paragraph and added the criticism that it doesn't do locking. Dixon saw the quoted first paragraph, which said that the link to the program was below. And indeed, it was below, in the first message from the remailer. It included this link, http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html. But Dixon apparently didn't understand the notion of quoting partial messages in a mailing list conversation. He just saw the part about the link being below, and in Gerow's message there was no such link. So he complained: there was nothing below. But Gerow misunderstood, he though Dixon was commenting about EncFS's locking mechanisms. So Gerow responded as below, adding to the confusion. Honestly, I don't know how you people generate enough brain power to keep yourselves alive. CP On 4/28/05, Damian Gerow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thus spake Jim Dixon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 09:41]: : It also doesn't do locking. : : There was nothing below. Someone I know just tried it out three days ago. He said it flat-out didn't 'lock' the files properly. It's got nothing to do with having something below.
Re: EncFS
Thus spake cypherpunk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 18:48]: : A remailer posted about EncFS. Gerow quoted the first paragraph and : added the criticism that it doesn't do locking. Dixon saw the quoted : first paragraph, which said that the link to the program was below. : And indeed, it was below, in the first message from the remailer. It : included this link, http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html. But Dixon : apparently didn't understand the notion of quoting partial messages in : a mailing list conversation. He just saw the part about the link being : below, and in Gerow's message there was no such link. So he : complained: there was nothing below. But Gerow misunderstood, he : though Dixon was commenting about EncFS's locking mechanisms. So Gerow : responded as below, adding to the confusion. In my defense, I assumed a baseline of understanding when it comes to public lists. The last thing I expected was him to quote /me/ and complain about something that someone /else/ had said, when it was all painfully obvious from the first message. I guess I just won't assume that around here anymore. : Honestly, I don't know how you people generate enough brain power to : keep yourselves alive. Breathing comes automatically. No thought required.
Re: EncFS
Thus spake Userbeam Remailer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27/04/05 02:33]: : EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to source and binary releases below. It also doesn't do locking.
Re: EncFS
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Damian Gerow wrote: Thus spake Userbeam Remailer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27/04/05 02:33]: : EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without : any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel : module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to : source and binary releases below. It also doesn't do locking. There was nothing below. -- Jim Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel +44 117 982 0786 mobile +44 797 373 7881 http://xlattice.sourceforge.net p2p communications infrastructure
Re: EncFS
Thus spake Jim Dixon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [28/04/05 09:41]: : It also doesn't do locking. : : There was nothing below. Someone I know just tried it out three days ago. He said it flat-out didn't 'lock' the files properly. It's got nothing to do with having something below.
EncFS
EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to source and binary releases below. As with most encrypted filesystems, Encfs is meant to provide security against off-line attacks; ie your notebook is stolen, your backups are stolen, etc. The way Encfs works is different from the loopback encrypted filesystem support built into the Linux kernel because it works on files at a time, not an entire block device. This is a big advantage in some ways, but does not come without a cost. http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html
Re: EncFS
Thus spake Userbeam Remailer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [27/04/05 02:33]: : EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to source and binary releases below. It also doesn't do locking.
EncFS
EncFS provides an encrypted filesystem in user-space. It runs without any special permissions and uses the FUSE library and Linux kernel module to provide the filesystem interface. You can find links to source and binary releases below. As with most encrypted filesystems, Encfs is meant to provide security against off-line attacks ie your notebook is stolen, your backups are stolen, etc. The way Encfs works is different from the loopback encrypted filesystem support built into the Linux kernel because it works on files at a time, not an entire block device. This is a big advantage in some ways, but does not come without a cost. http://arg0.net/users/vgough/encfs.html
