From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juan Quintela Subject: Re: Hi Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:09:38 +0100 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <86lm0ctfp9.fsf@trasno.mitica> References: <20030218150457.20101.qmail@webmail30.rediffmail.com> <20030218163422.GC1399@arthur.ubicom.tudelft.nl> <1045609648.18245.0.camel@imladris.demon.co.uk> <86adgsuxrl.fsf@trasno.mitica> <1045668167.19863.27.camel@passion.cambridge.redhat.com> <8665rguvrq.fsf@trasno.mitica> <20030219154020.GC2516@arthur.ubicom.tudelft.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Woodhouse , Rajaram Suresh Gaunker , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org Return-path: To: Erik Mouw In-Reply-To: <20030219154020.GC2516@arthur.ubicom.tudelft.nl> (Erik Mouw's message of "Wed, 19 Feb 2003 16:40:20 +0100") List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org >>>>> "erik" == Erik Mouw writes: erik> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >> I think that the only reason why encryption at the filesystem level >> makes sense is when you want to only encrypt _some_ files, but at that >> point, you can also encrypt by hand them with some script/similar :( erik> Or do something like libz: on the fly or even transparent erik> encryption/decryption of files. I meaned basically to do it out of kernel land, that solution also works for me :) Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy