Originally posted by -MacNuke-
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux 5.6 Is Looking Like It Will Be Spectacular With A Long List Of Features
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 3
-
Originally posted by narciso View PostNo AMD Zen2 CPPC support yet?
Other thing, it is not only for zen 2, it is too for zen cpu's , Michael had an error there and there is no correction yet in that thread I think.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Neraxa View Post
Thats not a good solution for everyone. Partitions come with too many side effects, such as how they can create a disk usage structure that cannot be easily changed later, given that it can be difficult to predict from the outset how much each partition will need, you could end up wasting space or have space locked up in one partition as the other partition becomes full. So this can be a very messy set up. If you need really fined grained control over which directories should be encrypted, it can lead also to a mind boggling mess of mount points.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by Neraxa View Post
Thats not a good solution for everyone. Partitions come with too many side effects, such as how they can create a disk usage structure that cannot be easily changed later, given that it can be difficult to predict from the outset how much each partition will need, you could end up wasting space or have space locked up in one partition as the other partition becomes full. So this can be a very messy set up. If you need really fined grained control over which directories should be encrypted, it can lead also to a mind boggling mess of mount points.
But if I could only shrink and move my XFS /home over ....is a phrase I will never say again
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Neraxa View PostFilesystem 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.
Have you actually measured the performance loss with LUKS? It's the same kind of sentiment as with SSL exceptions, because encrypting everything is sooo expensive. Like <1% these days. So why the hell would you risk it.
ZFS is unfit for single disk scenarios (read: 95% of desktops), Btrfs is EOL'd on RHEL, eCryptfs is EOL'd, fscrypt is half-@ssed at best (already ranted about it to great extent), so you really have no other option but LUKS. With Clevis TPM2 automatic unlock it's pretty decent, that's the setup we've been deploying for the past 2 months or so.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by Neraxa View PostThats not a good solution for everyone. Partitions come with too many side effects, such as how they can create a disk usage structure that cannot be easily changed later, given that it can be difficult to predict from the outset how much each partition will need, you could end up wasting space or have space locked up in one partition as the other partition becomes full. So this can be a very messy set up. If you need really fined grained control over which directories should be encrypted, it can lead also to a mind boggling mess of mount points.
Most people I know just encrypt everything. It's not like that you execute multiple gigabytes of binaries per second from /usr/bin on a daily basis.
edit: And btw. only encrypting i.e. /home gives one a nice opportunity to single-user boot your PC and place a keylogger/trojan into /usr/bin. Since it is not encrypted it easily accessible.Last edited by -MacNuke-; 26 January 2020, 05:41 PM.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by amdtesterman View Post
there won't be any cppc support because Linux developpers want schedutil to be the only governor in Linux. They want to add the features of cppc to this governos. intel pstate was different because there was no plans to do this before. Correct me if it is not.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment