Re: [tlug] Raid5 box & backup

[Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>]

On 2008-05-25 13:50 +0900 (Sun), Edmund Edgar wrote:

> - You create a TrueCrypt volume, with its own password, for each of your
> private parts. (Stop sniggering at the back, you know what I mean...) I
> think you should be able to mount each volume over your local network using
> Samba, so your client PC will have access to an encrypted volume which it
> will decrypt locally, using the password for that volume.

Interesting. So a TrueCrypt volume is just layered over top of a
standard filesystem, and appears as a real filesystem with files in it
to someone not using TrueCrypt? If not, you can't use it that way.

On 2008-05-25 18:47 +0900 (Sun), bruno raoult wrote:

> If replication is based on files/directories (instead of filesystem), I
> think the direction does not matter any more, does it?

Yes, but then whatever's doing the replication has to have access to
your key, so they can see the files and directories, as well as be
mounting and reading the files on the remote end. In other words, you
can only back up from your laptop, and it's going to be dog slow,
because you'll be reading huge amounts of data from both ends.

The only way you can hope to reasonably fast rsync or unison style
syncing is if each local machine has unencrypted access to the
filesystem. You might be able to do this livably by using encrypted
files on top of unencrypted filesystems.

> > You also want to figure out what level of security you really need here.
> 
> Hummm... Security is mandatory, obviously.

No, it's not. Were it mandatory, you'd be paying me tens of thousands of
dollars to set this up for you. Which I'm happy to do, of course.

Oh, what's that? Suddenly you don't need *that much* security? :-)

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson       <cjs@example.com>        +81 90 7737 2974   
Mobile sites and software consulting: http://www.starling-software.com