Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 5.6 Is Looking Like It Will Be Spectacular With A Long List Of Features

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linux 5.6 Is Looking Like It Will Be Spectacular With A Long List Of Features

    Phoronix: Linux 5.6 Is Looking Like It Will Be Spectacular With A Long List Of Features

    Linux 5.5 is likely to be released later today and with that are many new features. But as soon as 5.5 is released it marks the opening of the Linux 5.6 merge window and this next kernel has us particularly exciting... It's certainly shaping up to be one of the most exciting kernel cycles in recent times with many blockbuster features and improvements...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag....6-Spectacular

  • #2
    Super hyped about not having to install the Wireguard akmod anymore.

    Comment


    • #3
      Filesystem related things on Linux have long been a mess, full of half assed solutions and disclaimers like "we know its broken, and we don't care", or, "you can't do it the way you want, you can only do it this way, even though it does not work well for you". For many users, having encryption done above the filesystem is far preferable, since encrypting everything at the block layer is overkill. Most people don't need /usr/bin encrypted. Talking about needless performance degradation. So the idea that this is the only well supported way to have encryption is retarded. A lot of people just want per directory encryption, and they want it to be secure, reliable and robust. Reading the documentation for the kernels ecryptfs solution gives you the impression that no one cares about it, and the kernel people don't like it that you are using it. and the idea that people should encrypt /usr/bin and everything is absurd. Encrypting at block layer is what many people do not want. But for no good reason, kernel people think you should have to encrypt everything at the block layer. There is no technical reason, encryption above filesystem can be perfectly robust, no excuses.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Neraxa View Post
        Most people don't need /usr/bin encrypted.
        That's why partitions are a thing, you know. If someone only wants to encrypt /home it is totally possible even on the block layer.

        Comment


        • #5
          Typo: Multipath, not Multipatch.

          Comment


          • #6
            Neraxa

            What stops you from using ecryptfs per directory encryption? It seems your logic is retarded

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Volta View Post
              Neraxa

              What stops you from using ecryptfs per directory encryption? It seems your logic is retarded
              ecryptfs has quite a performance overhead.

              Comment


              • #8
                Neraxa Sounds like you are looking for a solution like EncFS that is an usermode solution for encrypting directories.

                Comment


                • #9
                  No AMD Zen2 CPPC support yet?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Neraxa View Post
                    Filesystem related things on Linux have long been a mess, full of half assed solutions and disclaimers like "we know its broken, and we don't care", or, "you can't do it the way you want, you can only do it this way, even though it does not work well for you". For many users, having encryption done above the filesystem is far preferable, since encrypting everything at the block layer is overkill. Most people don't need /usr/bin encrypted. Talking about needless performance degradation. So the idea that this is the only well supported way to have encryption is retarded. A lot of people just want per directory encryption, and they want it to be secure, reliable and robust. Reading the documentation for the kernels ecryptfs solution gives you the impression that no one cares about it, and the kernel people don't like it that you are using it. and the idea that people should encrypt /usr/bin and everything is absurd. Encrypting at block layer is what many people do not want. But for no good reason, kernel people think you should have to encrypt everything at the block layer. There is no technical reason, encryption above filesystem can be perfectly robust, no excuses.
                    You should look into ZFS datasets and per dataset encryption. They solve all of those problems. Every directory can be set to be a different dataset with its own encryption as necessary. Granted, that doesn't solve the block layer hangup you have, but it works great for per-directory encryption or non-encryption of system level, variable sized directories.

                    For end user, per-directory, non-system level stuff, Plasma's vaults does that well enough and does solve that.

                    It's a pain in the ass when compared to ZFS, but LUKS and LVM can also be used to provide per directory encryption for system level stuff.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X