Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Could the encryption be made optional? #7

Closed
ranrub opened this issue Sep 5, 2019 · 7 comments · Fixed by #67
Closed

Could the encryption be made optional? #7

ranrub opened this issue Sep 5, 2019 · 7 comments · Fixed by #67

Comments

@ranrub
Copy link

ranrub commented Sep 5, 2019

I would like my files to be accessible on the s3 repo for distribution via e.g. cloudfront.

@flomlo
Copy link

flomlo commented Nov 11, 2022

Hi!

I would be interested in making encryption optiona as welll, though my main use case is the local storage backend. There are filesystems with built-in compression and that would be a neat way to make use of it. In my case it would reduce the bloat by a factor of ~3.
Furthermore, I do like the increased transparency.

I had a look at the branch created 2019, which introduced the option, but never made it into main.

Would you consider accepting a PR with the code from 2019 adapted to the current version? I can test it with the local backend, but I don't have any means to test it on S3.

@jasonwhite
Copy link
Owner

Would you consider accepting a PR with the code from 2019 adapted to the current version? I can test it with the local backend, but I don't have any means to test it on S3.

Yes, I'm always open to PRs! Adapting that old PR to recent changes should be relatively straightforward. The main thing is that the impl Storage for Either should no longer be necessary because Box is now used to abstract away the composition of backends.

When you have a PR, I can test it on S3. (I have a free-tier account that I test with.)

@greyltc
Copy link

greyltc commented Apr 18, 2024

I'm working on implementing this here: https://github.com/greyltc/rudolfs/tree/encryption-optional based on what you've already done in #8 Jason.
Bear with me here please, this is my first time rusting. At present, what I've got there in greyltc@5c0ea44 completely diables encryption in a non-optional way. I've played around with it a bit, and this seems to work fine. Now I'll see about adding back in the option to turn encryption on (I'm not sure I understand why so much Either code needs to exist for this in the original PR).

@jasonwhite
Copy link
Owner

@greyltc I went ahead and revived my old PR: #67. Includes tests and everything. Let me know if this works for you.

@greyltc
Copy link

greyltc commented Apr 25, 2024

@jasonwhite tested. working like a charm! thanks very much!

@greyltc
Copy link

greyltc commented May 3, 2024

@jasonwhite could we get a 0.3.7 tag for this?

@jasonwhite
Copy link
Owner

@greyltc Done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants