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

Enable Encryption of Top Level Folders #1147

Closed
Vortex-TH opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Enable Encryption of Top Level Folders #1147

Vortex-TH opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@Vortex-TH
Copy link

Vortex-TH commented Mar 17, 2019

Expected behaviour

It should be possible to encrypt and decrypt top-level folders with the desktop client.

Actual behaviour

It is not possible to encrypt top-level folders with the desktop client. When creating a new top-level folder (by clicking 'Add Folder Sync Connection'), it is possible to select and connect with a folder from the server that is already encrypted. However, in this case the desktop client is not able to decrypt the files from the folder. Contrarily, files will be uploaded but not encrypted if they are placed in this folder on the desktop client.

Steps to reproduce

  1. Install End-to-End encryption
  2. Create an encrypted folder on the Server (for example by using the mobile client)
  3. On the desktop client, add a new top-level folder with 'Add Folder Sync Connection'
  4. Select the encrypted folder from the server to connect to
  5. Notice that encryption/decryption of top-level folders does not work (Picture 1). It only works for subfolders (Picture 2). Notice that connecting with encrypted folders is still possible but leads to some undesirable behaviour.

Client version: 2.5.1
Operating system: Linux

Note: Issue addresses #1063 which was wrongfully closed.

Picture 1

Picture 2

@claell
Copy link

claell commented Apr 8, 2020

@Vortex-TH thanks for opening this. I guess you opened this, because #1063 was wrongly closed. I reopened #1063 now, so can you move your additional description from here to the description of #1063? Then we can close this as a duplicate and track your issue further in #1063.

@misch7
Copy link
Member

misch7 commented May 18, 2020

Thanks for coordinating and moving this to the original issue #1063 @Vortex-TH and @claell .

I'll close this issue as duplicate then, so we have a better overview - we already have a lot of E2EE issues open.

@misch7 misch7 closed this as completed May 18, 2020
@claell
Copy link

claell commented May 20, 2020

Duplicate of #1063

@claell claell marked this as a duplicate of #1063 May 20, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants