Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:32:13PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is > > > time to bring this up again: > > > http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 > > > > Are you a troll? > > > > This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. > > > > Andrew referred to "well-known weaknesses" in cryptoloop, > > and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to > > were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that > > his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. > > > > Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, > > just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. > > > > I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three > > very soon. > > I'd say that "no-maintainer" + "maintained code can do the same" is enough, > but... > I thought that ide-scsi was deprecated, too? You can attach a file to loopback and then run dm-crypt on top of that, so I think it's completely duplicate functionality at this point. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
Hi! > > 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is > > time to bring this up again: > > http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 > > Are you a troll? > > This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. > > Andrew referred to "well-known weaknesses" in cryptoloop, > and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to > were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that > his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. > > Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, > just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. > > I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three > very soon. I'd say that "no-maintainer" + "maintained code can do the same" is enough, but... I thought that ide-scsi was deprecated, too? -- 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
Hi! 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is time to bring this up again: http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 Are you a troll? This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. Andrew referred to well-known weaknesses in cryptoloop, and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three very soon. I'd say that no-maintainer + maintained code can do the same is enough, but... I thought that ide-scsi was deprecated, too? -- 64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:32:13PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is time to bring this up again: http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 Are you a troll? This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. Andrew referred to well-known weaknesses in cryptoloop, and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three very soon. I'd say that no-maintainer + maintained code can do the same is enough, but... I thought that ide-scsi was deprecated, too? You can attach a file to loopback and then run dm-crypt on top of that, so I think it's completely duplicate functionality at this point. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 10:35:24PM +0100, Alexander Nyberg wrote: > 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is > time to bring this up again: > http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 Are you a troll? This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. Andrew referred to "well-known weaknesses" in cryptoloop, and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three very soon. Andries - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is time to bring this up again: http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 I'm no cryptanalyst, but googling a bit shows a bunch of problems with it (also see above thread), there is no maintainer and most importantly there is a replacement for it that has active maintainers. Redundant security solutions is a risky thing to me. = Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 1.4 vs edited = --- 1.4/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-01-14 22:22:44 +01:00 +++ edited/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-03-05 22:13:12 +01:00 @@ -15,3 +15,10 @@ Why: It has been unmaintained for a numb against the LSB, and can be replaced by using udev. Who: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> + +What: cryptoloop +When: July 2005 +Files: drivers/block/cryptoloop.c and parts of drivers/block/loop.c +Why: Unmaintained, has vulnerabilities that haven't been fixed. + Superseded by dm-crypt that has been in mainline for a long time + now: http://www.saout.de/misc/dm-crypt/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is time to bring this up again: http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 I'm no cryptanalyst, but googling a bit shows a bunch of problems with it (also see above thread), there is no maintainer and most importantly there is a replacement for it that has active maintainers. Redundant security solutions is a risky thing to me. = Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 1.4 vs edited = --- 1.4/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-01-14 22:22:44 +01:00 +++ edited/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2005-03-05 22:13:12 +01:00 @@ -15,3 +15,10 @@ Why: It has been unmaintained for a numb against the LSB, and can be replaced by using udev. Who: Greg Kroah-Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] + +What: cryptoloop +When: July 2005 +Files: drivers/block/cryptoloop.c and parts of drivers/block/loop.c +Why: Unmaintained, has vulnerabilities that haven't been fixed. + Superseded by dm-crypt that has been in mainline for a long time + now: http://www.saout.de/misc/dm-crypt/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop reminder
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 10:35:24PM +0100, Alexander Nyberg wrote: 2.6.3-mm1 'dm-crypt vs. cryptoloop' discussion was some time ago, it is time to bring this up again: http://kerneltrap.org/node/2433 Are you a troll? This is not something to be quoted by anybody serious. Andrew referred to well-known weaknesses in cryptoloop, and when I inquired it turned out that what he referred to were properties of cryptoloop and dm-crypt alike, so that his remarks that started that discussion were misguided. Of course people may prefer dm-crypt or cryptoloop or loop-aes, just like people prefer ide-cd or ide-scsi. I have not yet seen a valid reason to deprecate one of these three very soon. Andries - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
