<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dear Fedora Developers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2007/11/26/dear-fedora-developers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2007/11/26/dear-fedora-developers/</link>
	<description>Blog about geeky stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 09:38:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2007/11/26/dear-fedora-developers/comment-page-1/#comment-143</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2007/11/26/dear-fedora-developers/#comment-143</guid>
		<description>We&apos;re working on some bits for easier file system (well, really block device) encryption for Fedora 9 that will basically boil down to    [X] Encrypt and protect data that then prompts you to unlock at boot.  First anaconda bits landed about a week ago, but there&apos;s still quite a bit more work to do.   The problem with the &quot;encrypt my home directory&quot; case is that all of the encryption solutions are block device based.  And a separate block device per user home directory just doesn&apos;t scale.  Growing and shrinking filesystems online sucks (ie, you can&apos;t shrink) and you can&apos;t know a priori how much space each user is going to need.  So blah, losing. &lt;a href=&quot;http://ecryptfs.sf.net&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;eCryptFS&lt;/a&gt; is somewhat promising as an overlay filesystem, but alas, not nearly ready and progress is slow on things like separate encryption keys per fs subtree and allowing things like a ~/Public which _isn&apos;t_ encrypted (so that it can be access by apache which won&apos;t have access to your keyring and thus wouldn&apos;t be able to decrypt it)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&apos;re working on some bits for easier file system (well, really block device) encryption for Fedora 9 that will basically boil down to    [X] Encrypt and protect data that then prompts you to unlock at boot.  First anaconda bits landed about a week ago, but there&apos;s still quite a bit more work to do.   The problem with the &#8220;encrypt my home directory&#8221; case is that all of the encryption solutions are block device based.  And a separate block device per user home directory just doesn&apos;t scale.  Growing and shrinking filesystems online sucks (ie, you can&apos;t shrink) and you can&apos;t know a priori how much space each user is going to need.  So blah, losing. <a href="http://ecryptfs.sf.net" rel="nofollow">eCryptFS</a> is somewhat promising as an overlay filesystem, but alas, not nearly ready and progress is slow on things like separate encryption keys per fs subtree and allowing things like a ~/Public which _isn&apos;t_ encrypted (so that it can be access by apache which won&apos;t have access to your keyring and thus wouldn&apos;t be able to decrypt it)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2007/11/26/dear-fedora-developers/feed/ ) in 1.14670 seconds, on Feb 11th, 2012 at 2:07 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 11th, 2012 at 3:07 am UTC -->
