From nobody Thu Aug 24 12:08:19 2023 X-Original-To: questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RWhh42FMzz4r5J9 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:08:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from infoomatic@gmx.at) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "Telekom Security ServerID OV Class 2 CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RWhh30frVz3WNw for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 12:08:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from infoomatic@gmx.at) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=gmx.at header.s=s31663417 header.b="BsJO/y6q"; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of infoomatic@gmx.at designates 212.227.17.20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=infoomatic@gmx.at; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmx.at DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.at; s=s31663417; t=1692878903; x=1693483703; i=infoomatic@gmx.at; bh=xIHD0tcP8cM+YUZ+DayncsjmLgFOp8g3hmd9pGiPVBY=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=BsJO/y6qAI/C/595hsTl42svcX0a4ITGJ6ADoWV0Y79AA9exYtHyoHOicHGkY+BufzRARH7 /Y09okRQcNvlmUnssuAh3FVE7yHs8JFeap9oXH7yU2MhQSmfBsxjts0rdGsmQUJAsOFPGxBOB 898mlFQdzx5NqltqufsQ0CSr1soTWMYc0Z/FFa9fXXGauRicmqlhFgLuMPuVlnxMLT2a/cYsN vYP/JWE49Kjn4KCHRnkTbOt8eCkRrmFWzAA8ARvOppXw6BzY7itn7AJ2zo8ew9ZubMWLvKv5v HZ5ee266/H/NzklrVtz1qoByFC21HkBjtghvI5RvzAjV9+vpkDcw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from [10.0.1.209] ([178.114.187.129]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mdvqg-1pyRXN1enG-00b7MY; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:08:23 +0200 Message-ID: <6b741e03-732e-f1b8-6340-0a8897fb8235@gmx.at> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:08:19 +0200 List-Id: User questions List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-questions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 Subject: Re: Is ZFS native encryption safe to use? Content-Language: en-US To: Dewayne , questions@freebsd.org References: <0e7d2657-f857-01a8-f764-33b9c62c11f1@netfence.it> From: infoomatic In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:4urUegSJrGQ4aiDiQVUZVX/IX4NZTIO1HvTvdgHnLheaqNN2IVQ 6aAR2oKrKXvfg3vB6mw4W4+RPHWGpY9sdiJMU9ez9Dtf2HcILeOCNwR6+ZFwlDnn0qbOuem SvKJie6roogNZoYN2sj3go4kkaTRqtnjLBl4inhgUVW3JJXIE3f5sH1Nl95JN/CjDY8vTVd avWsx6Qy2wb5hUzsDBLjA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:fdesIm+z73w=;inSO3Y1yhqyln4FtqztgFQNOFSF NcSoc/rrNAL6weY/uOIVf/GZwvO8OYILFiIWaOoPmcd3Muc1OLdVNn+SZ3H95uLNQ/yrLMSzF 74q9Tmgs8kAl/opnKO2NelHDOHN+/1cOIyI5HLoJbFl8dhLAIAHYYaT5ktBCKJaP/1btaijeY u1u45U2Kag2IHEdyQ0nfaepz2lN14Zt6pmdR0ew2i++4uBWWfn4BhVZL6yTJQjsVoXkrEW2Tq 2V+ngoiMbOrxNFnb7n2eR/QEPUfKloF7jrTyqtZasJ03upcjzm6HcnWmro4jgJ2M8M/AScKLV kn28cOvcfs6V8BcPYgeQaYqOjyWVLGveAChjoqOzZaJifeNDT+eHeuZhSi3Fw+/in64/cFmlE mOuijmeTmv0OsbouUXI+QXSAsG5Ec9Gx1qjMK7t6U2RmwPk/lfMVQW4BC3F9DMhGWL57BLbaN 6rn873++Uj7F/BG7aX65mvIRRape91CqTEHzYhlYyR8zxGFthahshhrBjcnWmJ3d7rBkuMWM5 2mvB2ASOhU3rc2Wr2p2/PsKVfcmoSxBujc5oKcqQjPOzeFn3Iw8GDypkZg1+Qbj0KXe1Q3TyA pNFpsuT5N8KrUnS6HfYuWlyoHZ0j7IVDAcBB5UI+wds1QvjxHYL193abHgOekcKcs3AGjC0IE LpWFuqkl4SswA4FVgtPmnW7pDhbldlC1028zhujsM3W9tneOB8H1VjB28WahUQtXOSBbeVFQU 06PjQ4jGsb5dl2Qhl9Rsv6wybGiBosAK+TVKIezajusamh1hwAu53uEkfGOcgJa0aeW82MK3I 9DWxMtP6IwSxKJNdelQQM3uWBAXnfT80WYVQe9JQQ3PbIxJc+B3bcHD9ZSlZksAe+tH5HR8nK nJJxAKvKjnPrOg9X9fFs3w6l2+K+n8LtAZcfOUR27Sz2bo42v++c+G/cb00iHXCyV8Pc37FZ0 kxJlWA== X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.72 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.52)[-0.522]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmx.at,none]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmx.at:s=s31663417]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:212.227.17.0/27]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_VERYGOOD(-0.20)[212.227.17.20:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[212.227.17.20:from]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[questions@freebsd.org]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:8560, ipnet:212.227.0.0/16, country:DE]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmx.at:+]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmx.at]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmx.at]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4RWhh30frVz3WNw On 24.08.23 00:43, Dewayne wrote: > Thx for the performance hint.=C2=A0 Were you using the same cipher on ea= ch? Yes, I have tried various combinations, but the difference was so huge that I did not let the benchmarks finish cause I felt it was wasted time and resources! > On 23/08/2023 5:34 pm, infoomatic wrote: >> last time (when 13.0 was released) I compared them: >> >> *) GELI + normal zfs was significantly faster than encrypted-zfs >> *) encrypted zfs to share files between Linux and FreeBSD did not work >> properly, resulting in Files non-readable on FreeBSD >>