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

[Neraxa]

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.

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.

[skeevy420]

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.

[narciso]

No AMD Zen2 CPPC support yet?

[Etherman]

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

[Britoid]

Neraxa

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

ecryptfs has quite a performance overhead.

[Volta]

Neraxa

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

[cthart]

Typo: Multipath, not Multipatch.

[-MacNuke-]

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.

[Neraxa]

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.

[Britoid]

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