From: Darren J Moffat [mailto:darr...@opensolaris.org]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 12:46 PM
GRUB2 has support
for encrypted ZFS file systems already.
I assume this requires a pre-boot password, right? Then I have two
questions...
I noticed in solaris 11, when you init 6 it doesn't
On 02/21/12 13:27, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
From: Darren J Moffat [mailto:darr...@opensolaris.org]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 12:46 PM
GRUB2 has support
for encrypted ZFS file systems already.
I assume this requires a pre-boot password, right? Then I have two
questions...
The ZFS
On 02/16/12 15:35, David Magda wrote:
On Thu, February 16, 2012 09:55, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
I've never used ZFS encryption. How does it work? Do you need to type in
a pre-boot password? And if so, how do you do that with a server? Or does
it use TPM or something similar, to avoid the
I've never used ZFS encryption. How does it work? Do you need to type in a
pre-boot password? And if so, how do you do that with a server? Or does it
use TPM or something similar, to avoid the need for a pre-boot password?
Thanks...
___
On Thu, February 16, 2012 09:55, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
I've never used ZFS encryption. How does it work? Do you need to type in
a pre-boot password? And if so, how do you do that with a server? Or does
it use TPM or something similar, to avoid the need for a pre-boot password?
Darren
From: David Magda [mailto:dma...@ee.ryerson.ca]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 10:35 AM
On Thu, February 16, 2012 09:55, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
I've never used ZFS encryption. How does it work? Do you need to type
in
a pre-boot password? And if so, how do you do that with a
-Original Message-
From: David Magda [mailto:dma...@ee.ryerson.ca]
Sent: 星期二, 六月 28, 2011 10:41
To: Fred Liu
Cc: Bill Sommerfeld; ZFS Discuss
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption accelerator card
recommendations.[GPU acceleration of ZFS]
On Jun 27, 2011, at 22:03, Fred Liu
Thanks for this pointer ... I have been looking for a small (low
power) server for a bit now and did not realize that HP had anything
in the line below the ML-1xx.
One of the reviews at the HP site note that the 5.25 media bay is
IDE only (from a BIOS perspective), can you confirm or deny
On Jun 27, 2011, at 17:16, Erik Trimble wrote:
Think about how things were done with the i386 and i387. That's what I'm=
after. With modern CPU buses like AMD Intel support, plopping a co-pro=
cessor into another CPU socket would really, really help.
Given the amount of transistors that
On 06/27/11 11:32 PM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 06/27/11 15:24, David Magda wrote:
Given the amount of transistors that are available nowadays I think
it'd be simpler to just create a series of SIMD instructions right
in/on general CPUs, and skip the whole co-processor angle.
see:
All (Ultra)SPARC T2, T2+, and T3 CPUs should have these capabilities; if
you have some other CPU the capabilities are probably not present. Run
'prtdiag | head -20' to see the CPUs on your system/s; run cryptoadm(1M)
with the list option (Solaris 10+) to see the software and hardware
I recently bought an HP Proliant Microserver for a home file server.
( pics and more here:
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=20968192 )
I installed 5 1.5TB (5900 RPM) drives, upgraded the memory to 8GB, and
installed Solaris 11 Express without a hitch.
A few simple tests using dd
IMO a faster processor with built-in AES and other crypto support is
most likely to give you the most bang for your buck, particularly if
you're using closed Solaris 11, as Solaris engineering is likely to
add support for new crypto instructions faster than Illumos (but I
don't really know enough
On 6/27/2011 9:55 AM, Roberto Waltman wrote:
I recently bought an HP Proliant Microserver for a home file server.
( pics and more here:
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=20968192 )
I installed 5 1.5TB (5900 RPM) drives, upgraded the memory to 8GB, and
installed Solaris 11 Express
On Mon, June 27, 2011 15:24, Erik Trimble wrote:
[...]
I'm always kind of surprised that there hasn't been a movement to create
standardized crypto commands, like the various FP-specific commands that
are part of MMX/SSE/etc. That way, most of this could be done in
hardware seamlessly.
The
On 6/27/2011 1:13 PM, David Magda wrote:
On Mon, June 27, 2011 15:24, Erik Trimble wrote:
[...]
I'm always kind of surprised that there hasn't been a movement to create
standardized crypto commands, like the various FP-specific commands that
are part of MMX/SSE/etc. That way, most of this
On Jun 27, 2011, at 17:16, Erik Trimble wrote:
Think about how things were done with the i386 and i387. That's what I'm
after. With modern CPU buses like AMD Intel support, plopping a
co-processor into another CPU socket would really, really help.
Given the amount of transistors that are
On 06/27/11 15:24, David Magda wrote:
Given the amount of transistors that are available nowadays I think
it'd be simpler to just create a series of SIMD instructions right
in/on general CPUs, and skip the whole co-processor angle.
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES_instruction_set
Present
On Jun 27, 2011, at 18:32, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On 06/27/11 15:24, David Magda wrote:
Given the amount of transistors that are available nowadays I think
it'd be simpler to just create a series of SIMD instructions right
in/on general CPUs, and skip the whole co-processor angle.
see:
...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of David Magda
Sent: 星期二, 六月 28, 2011 9:23
To: Bill Sommerfeld
Cc: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Encryption accelerator card recommendations.
On Jun 27, 2011, at 18:32, Bill Sommerfeld wrote
On Jun 27, 2011, at 22:03, Fred Liu wrote:
FYI There is another thread named -- GPU acceleration of ZFS in this
list to discuss the possibility to utilize the power of GPGPU.
I posted here:
In a similar vein I recently came across SSLShader:
http://shader.kaist.edu/sslshader/
On Jun 27, 2011 9:24 PM, David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca wrote:
AESNI is certain better than nothing, but RSA, SHA, and the RNG would be
nice as well. It'd also be handy for ZFS crypto in addition to all the
network IO stuff.
The most important reason for AES-NI might be not performance but
On Jun 27, 2011 4:15 PM, David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca wrote:
The (Ultra)SPARC T-series processors do, but to a certain extent it goes
against a CPU manufacturers best (financial) interest to provide this:
crypto is very CPU intensive using 'regular' instructions, so if you need
to do a lot
Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained product, have
you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with OpenSolaris,
we aren't going anywhere. (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexenta Systems
employee. :-)
-- Garrett
Hi Garrett,
I would like to know why you think Nexenta
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 01:06 -0700, Peter Taps wrote:
Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained product, have
you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with OpenSolaris,
we aren't going anywhere. (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexenta Systems
employee. :-)
--
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Peter Taps wrote:
Any business that is dependent on zfs must plan for two things as a contingency:
1. Look for an alternative for zfs
2. Look for an alternative for OpenSolaris
The existing OpenSolaris and zfs code bases are quite viable products
today. If Oracle
While we're on the topic, has anyone used ZFS much with Vormetric's encryption
product? Any feedback?
Doug Linder
--
Learn more about Merchant Link at www.merchantlink.com.
THIS MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL. This e-mail message and any attachments are
proprietary and confidential
Freddie Cash wrote:
You definitely want to do the ZFS bits from within FreeBSD.
Why not using ZFS in OpenSolaris? At least it has most stable/tested
implementation and also the newest one if needed?
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
on 11/07/2010 14:21 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk said the following:
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host)
and giving it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to
configure as a
From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Freddie Cash
ZFS-FUSE is horribly unstable,
That may be true. I couldn't say.
although that's more an indication of
the stability of the storage stack on Linux.
But this, I take
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Garrett D'Amore garr...@nexenta.comwrote:
Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained product, have
you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with OpenSolaris,
we aren't going anywhere. (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexenta Systems
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 12:55 -0700, Brandon High wrote:
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Garrett D'Amore
garr...@nexenta.com wrote:
Btw, if you want a commercially supported and maintained
product, have
you looked at NexentaStor? Regardless of what happens with
Garrett wrote:
I don't know about ramifications (though I suspect that a broadening
error scope would decrease ZFS' ability to isolate and work around
problematic regions on the media), but one thing I do know. If you use
FreeBSD disk encryption below ZFS, then you won't be able able to import
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Michael Johnson
mjjohnson@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host) and giving
it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to configure as a raidz2
volume.
On top of that, I'm considering using encryption. I
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host) and giving it
raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to configure as a raidz2 volume.
Wouldn't it be better or just as good to use fuse-zfs for such a configuration?
I/O from VirtualBox isn't really very good, but
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk r...@karlsbakk.net
wrote:
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host) and giving
it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to configure as a raidz2
volume.
Wouldn't it be better or just as good to use fuse-zfs
On Jul 11, 2010, at 5:11 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
ZFS-FUSE is horribly unstable, although that's more an indication of
the stability of the storage stack on Linux.
Not really, more an indication of the pseudo-VFS layer implemented in fuse.
Remember fuse provides it's own VFS
on 11/07/2010 15:54 Andriy Gapon said the following:
on 11/07/2010 14:21 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk said the following:
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host)
and giving it raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to
configure as a raidz2 volume.
I'm planning on running FreeBSD in VirtualBox (with a Linux host) and giving it
raw disk access to four drives, which I plan to configure as a raidz2 volume.
On top of that, I'm considering using encryption. I understand that ZFS
doesn't
yet natively support encryption, so my idea was to set
So far I'm using file container encryption using TrueCrypt on the client,
but I would seriously like native encryption support on Solaris itself,
especially in ZFS. From
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+zfs-crypto/ I see it's hopefully
coming in Q1 2010?
Are there any alternatives
Matthew Carras wrote:
So far I'm using file container encryption using TrueCrypt on the
client, but I would seriously like native encryption support on Solaris
itself, especially in ZFS. From
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+zfs-crypto/ I see it's
hopefully coming in Q1 2010?
Roger wrote:
Hello,
I am new to Solaris.
Several PDFs out there suggest any of the following:
a) Solaris comes with 128bit encryption (full filesystem)
b) Solaris supports full root encryption.
Can you send a pointer to these please, because the information is not
correct and I would like to
Hello,
I am new to Solaris.
Several PDFs out there suggest any of the following:
a) Solaris comes with 128bit encryption (full filesystem)
b) Solaris supports full root encryption.
Any truth to any of this?
The company I work for tis mandating full root encryption.
Thanks.
--
This message
On Jul 20, 2009, at 15:54, Roger wrote:
Several PDFs out there suggest any of the following:
a) Solaris comes with 128bit encryption (full filesystem)
b) Solaris supports full root encryption.
Any truth to any of this?
The company I work for tis mandating full root encryption.
Part (a) is
Hello everyone,
My understanding is that the ZFS crypto framework will not release until
2010. In light of that, I'm wondering if the following approach to
encryption could make sense for some subset of users:
The idea is to use the compression framework to do both compression and
Monish Shah wrote:
Hello everyone,
My understanding is that the ZFS crypto framework will not release until
2010.
That is incorrect information, where did you get that from ?
In light of that, I'm wondering if the following approach to
encryption could make sense for some subset of
Monish Shah wrote:
Hello Darren,
Monish Shah wrote:
Hello everyone,
My understanding is that the ZFS crypto framework will not release
until 2010.
That is incorrect information, where did you get that from ?
It was in Mike Shapiro's presentation at the Open Solaris Storage Summit
that
Hello Darren,
Monish Shah wrote:
Hello everyone,
My understanding is that the ZFS crypto framework will not release until
2010.
That is incorrect information, where did you get that from ?
It was in Mike Shapiro's presentation at the Open Solaris Storage Summit
that took place a couple
Hi
2006/8/22, Constantin Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Thomas Deutsch wrote:
I'm thinking about to change from Linux/Softwareraid to
OpenSolaris/ZFS. During this, I've got some (probably stupid)
questions:
don't worry, there are no stupid questions :).
1. Is ZFS able to encrypt all the
49 matches
Mail list logo
