From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265403AbTLHNuF (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 08:50:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265404AbTLHNuE (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 08:50:04 -0500 Received: from anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.92]:20232 "EHLO anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265403AbTLHNt6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 08:49:58 -0500 From: phillip@lougher.demon.co.uk To: "David Woodhouse" Cc: joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de, kbiswas@neoscale.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1070882901.31993.72.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Subject: Re: partially encrypted filesystem Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 13:49:57 +0000 User-Agent: Demon-WebMail/2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org dwmw2@infradead.org wrote: > On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 18:20 +0000, Phillip Lougher wrote: > > Considering that Jffs2 is the only writeable compressed filesystem, yes. > > What should be borne in mind is compressed filesystems never expect > > the data after compression to be bigger than the original data. > > In fact that assumption is fairly trivial to remove, if you can put an > upper bound on the growth. Adding encryption of data to JFFS2 would > actually be fairly trivial; encryption of metadata would be harder. > I was pointing out it had to be considered. Modesty prevented me from mentioning that adding encryption of both data and metadata to Squashfs would be very easy :-) Phillip