| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:49:17 +0200 |
| 3 |
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> I'm extending cryptoloop 2.6 to support compressors (almost done) and |
| 6 |
> losetup -e name /dev/loop? /where/your/file/is |
| 7 |
> works fine. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
As i see this thread i thought I'd reply, I too am using loop-aes for my |
| 11 |
encryption, this includes /home and other "vital" parts of the disk. So |
| 12 |
far I've maintained the patch and accessories outside of portage, and |
| 13 |
the patches too mount/losetup haven't worked against util-linux .12 |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
the parameters are quite "standard" |
| 17 |
/dev/hdc6 /home ext3 |
| 18 |
defaults,noauto,loop=/dev/loop6,encryption=AES128 0 0 |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The main choice for me too was the consistency in the setup when |
| 22 |
choosing loop-aes. it would work on future kernels (2.6) just as it did |
| 23 |
in 2.4. Major selling point, especially with the global uncertainity |
| 24 |
around kerneli.org and the kernel cryptoapi |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
//Spider |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
begin .signature |
| 31 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 32 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 33 |
end |
Archives