From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sigbj-st@operamail.com>
Received: from outbound3-nonen.messaging.lotuslive.com
	(outbound3-nonen.messaging.lotuslive.com [8.12.152.97])
	by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
	for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 14:54:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from outbound3.messaging.lotuslive.com (50.33.5.10.in-addr.arpa
	[10.5.33.50])
	by c-in3obnd03-02.sv2.lotusliveops.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id
	7261CBF81E
	for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:54:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from c-in3ofil03-02.sv2.lotusliveops.com (55.33.6.10.in-addr.arpa
	[10.6.33.55])
	by c-in3obnd03-02.sv2.lotusliveops.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id
	6FEE9BF7EE
	for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:54:52 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Si St" <sigbj-st@operamail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:54:52 +0100
Message-Id: <20100620125452.560634FCE0@c-in3ws--03-06.sv2.lotusliveops.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Bug in cryptsetup?
List-Id: <dm-crypt.saout.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/options/dm-crypt>,
	<mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-crypt@saout.de>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt>,
	<mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=subscribe>
To: dm-crypt@saout.de

I could try some newer version of cryptsetup if they will install. You prob=
ably remember that we tried out som debugging with cryptsetup 1.1.1 on my S=
LED_10, the apitest. The conclusion was that that an SLED_10 used a differe=
nt patch....:
(excerpt from MilanBroz' returnmail):
--BEGIN
"> 0 18968 crypt cbc(aes)-cbc-essiv:sha256=20
> 00000000000000000000000000000000 0 7:5 1032
> cipher: cbc(aes)-cbc-essiv:sha256

Great! thanks. Seems SuSe have some non-standard patch applied here,"
--END

But this might not apply to your question(?)
I have taken care of all the emails concerning this matter:apitest

But I could also try out this on my new SLED_11_SP1. Havent checked into th=
e cryptsetup there,yet.
Let me hear from you in case.

SS

/* OFFTOPIC; To Heinz Diehl:Thanks for your answer, Heinz Diehl!) */

SS-NORWAY
---------------------------------------------------------------------


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com>
> To: Si St <sigbj-st@operamail.com>
> Cc: dm-crypt@saout.de
> Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Bug in cryptsetup?
> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 23:50:04 +0200
>=20
>=20
> On 06/19/2010 07:20 PM, Si St wrote:
> > --cryptsetup version 1.0.3 , OS =3D SLED_10_SP3--
>=20
> Quite old version, it works for me in 1.1.2
>=20
> > cryptsetup luksDelKey /dev/hda5 1
> >
> > I receive only that I succeeded, and the actual Key in Slot 1 is=20
> > disabled testing it with luksDump.
>=20
> # cryptsetup luksDelKey 0 /dev/sde
> luksDelKey is a deprecated action name.
> Please use luksKillSlot.
> Device 0 doesn't exist or access denied.
>=20
> # cryptsetup luksDelKey /dev/sde 0
> luksDelKey is a deprecated action name.
> Please use luksKillSlot.
>=20
> WARNING!
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> This is the last keyslot. Device will become unusable after purging this =
key.
> ...
>=20
> # cryptsetup luksKillSlot /dev/sde 1
> Key 1 not active. Can't wipe.
>=20
> # cryptsetup --version
> cryptsetup 1.1.2
>=20
>=20
> Can you reproduce it with recent version?
> And I think we already found more problems with SLED10.
>=20
> Milan

>


--=20
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com