[ceph-users] Re: Important: RGW multisite bug may silently corrupt encrypted objects on replication

2023-05-31 Thread Casey Bodley
On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 7:24 AM Tobias Urdin wrote: > > Hello Casey, > > Understood, thanks! > > That means that the original copy in the site that it was uploaded to is still > safe as long as that copy is not removed, and no underlying changes below > RadosGW in the Ceph storage could corrupt

[ceph-users] Re: Important: RGW multisite bug may silently corrupt encrypted objects on replication

2023-05-31 Thread Tobias Urdin
Hello Casey, Understood, thanks! That means that the original copy in the site that it was uploaded to is still safe as long as that copy is not removed, and no underlying changes below RadosGW in the Ceph storage could corrupt the original copy? Best regards Tobias On 30 May 2023, at 14:48,

[ceph-users] Re: Important: RGW multisite bug may silently corrupt encrypted objects on replication

2023-05-30 Thread Casey Bodley
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 8:22 AM Tobias Urdin wrote: > > Hello Casey, > > Thanks for the information! > > Can you please confirm that this is only an issue when using > “rgw_crypt_default_encryption_key” > config opt that says “testing only” in the documentation [1] to enable > encryption and

[ceph-users] Re: Important: RGW multisite bug may silently corrupt encrypted objects on replication

2023-05-30 Thread Tobias Urdin
Hello Casey, Thanks for the information! Can you please confirm that this is only an issue when using “rgw_crypt_default_encryption_key” config opt that says “testing only” in the documentation [1] to enable encryption and not when using Barbican or Vault as KMS or using SSE-C with the S3 API?