Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 05:27:41 -0500 From: Scott Bennett <bennett@sdf.org> To: kpneal@pobox.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: some ZFS questions Message-ID: <201408241027.s7OARfEK004658@sdf.org> In-Reply-To: <20140822005911.GA52625@neutralgood.org> References: <201408070816.s778G9ug015988@sdf.org> <40AF5B49-80AF-4FE2-BA14-BFF86164EAA8@kraus-haus.org> <201408211007.s7LA7YGd002430@sdf.org> <20140822005911.GA52625@neutralgood.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
kpneal@pobox.com wrote:
> What's the harm in encrypting all the data?
High CPU overhead for both reading and writing is the main downside.
>
> In fact, encrypting all data is more secure. If you only encrypt the data
Sure, but why do it if the data don't need to be secret?
> that is secret then you've just told an attacker exactly what data it is
> you want secret.
>
Umm...I don't see that that necessarily follows, except in one case,
namely, when the attacker already knows what all of the data are.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet: bennett at sdf.org *xor* bennett at freeshell.org *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army." *
* -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
**********************************************************************
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201408241027.s7OARfEK004658>