Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Encryption questions
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 10:45:43
Message-Id: 2596092.3YoaiFbasq@dell_xps
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Encryption questions by Neil Bothwick
1 On Monday, 10 December 2018 09:25:58 GMT Neil Bothwick wrote:
2 > On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 23:15:21 -0600, Dale wrote:
3 > > Well, I thought it may be simpler. Since I've never tried encryption
4 > > before, I don't know first hand how it works or what it takes to use the
5 > > files. I've read where people password protect their mobo, bootloader
6 > > and their entire storage system. Basically, without the proper
7 > > passwords, you can't boot the system or access it from another system
8 > > either. That is overkill for me for sure. If anything, I'm on the
9 > > other end of the scale. I just want a directory, which could be a mount
10 > > point, that is encrypted. Knowing what tool is best may help be figure
11 > > out whether it is a mount point, a regular directory or what. I've read
12 > > where some whole file systems can be encrypted or it can be done on a
13 > > directory level. I'm not sure what works the best tho.
14 >
15 > It sounds like ecryptfs would suit your needs best. As it works on
16 > directories, you don't need separate mount points for each encrypted
17 > directory. ISTR there is a PAM module to unlock your ecryptfs directories
18 > when you log into your desktop (it needs a password login not
19 > auto-login).
20 >
21 > As already mentioned you can backup the encrypted files so your backups
22 > are automatically secure. One point about ecryptfs is increases the size
23 > of each file by a fixed amount. This doesn't matter with larger files but
24 > if you have a directory full of smaller files, like a mail client cache,
25 > there may be a noticeable increase in disk usage.
26 >
27 > Encrypting the whole filesystem may be more convenient as it means you
28 > don't have to worry about what is encrypted and what is not, but you
29 > would need to back up to an encrypted drive.
30 >
31 > Neither method will protect you from remote access while you are logged
32 > in as the encrypted files will be unlocked.
33
34 Another thing to mention is filesystem encryption. I don't know if ext4
35 encryption is mature enough for production implementations, but this was added
36 to the kernel a few years now. sys-fs/e2fsprogs includes e4crypt which can be
37 used to encrypt directories and files, each one secured with a different
38 encryption key, and each encryption key protected (encrypted) with a master
39 key in your keyring. So even if one file's encryption key is cracked, the
40 rest of the encrypted files should be secure.
41
42 BTW, if we're talking about a few files which are not being accessed
43 frequently, it may be worth considering the use of symmetric encryption using
44 a passphrase (gpg, or openssl). This would require no additional
45 configuration, overlay fs, keyrings, etc., thus making it simpler to use and
46 transport. However, the file names themselves won't be encrypted using this
47 method, which may or may not be important depending on your use case.
48
49 --
50 Regards,
51 Mick

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature