Re: [gentoo-user] Re: tmp on tmpfs

[J. Roeleveld]

On May 25, 2017 5:38:35 AM GMT+02:00, Kai Krakow <hurikhan77@×××××.com> wrote:
>Am Wed, 24 May 2017 12:30:36 -0700
>schrieb Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>:
>
>> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Ian Zimmerman <itz@×××××××.net>
>> wrote:
>> > On 2017-05-24 08:00, Kai Krakow wrote:
>> >
>> >> Unix semantics suggest that /tmp is not expected to survive
>reboots
>> >> anyways (in contrast, /var/tmp is expected to survive reboots), so
>> >> tmpfs is a logical consequence to use for /tmp.
>> >
>> > /tmp is wiped by the bootmisc init job anyway.
>> >
>>
>> In general I haven't found anything that is bothered by /var/tmp
>being
>> lost on reboot, but obviously that is something you need to be
>> prepared for if you put it on tmpfs.
>>
>> One thing that wasn't mentioned is that having /tmp in tmpfs might
>> also have security benefits depending on what is stored there, since
>> it won't be written to disk.  If you have a filesystem on tmpfs and
>> your swap is encrypted (which you should consider setting up since it
>> is essentially "free") then /tmp also becomes a useful dumping ground
>> for stuff that is decrypted for temporary processing.  For example,
>if
>> you keep your passwords in a gpg-encrypted file you could copy it to
>> /tmp, decrypt it there, do what you need to, and then delete it.
>That
>> wouldn't leave any recoverable traces of the file.
>
>Interesting point... How much performance impact does encrypted swap
>have? I don't mean any benchmark numbers but real life experience from
>your perspective when the system experiences memory pressure?

I have my laptop encrypted. Has 16GB and occasionally it does use swap. With it all being on SSD.
I am not noticing any slowdowns because of it.

--
Joost
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.