[Feature Request] eCryptfs Support

[CurtisLeeBolin]

I understand eCryptfs support is a huge request, but if no one asks, it doesn't have a chance. I also understand the project might not be at a point it could take on such a request.

The biggest use case I have found for eCryptfs is it works on a USB flash drive with a FAT32 file system. I can have encrypted and non-encrypted files on the same file system. I am not stuck with a fully encrypted drive. I can still plug my flash drive into consumer products like a copier and save scanned documents to the flash drive. Who really wants to carry 2 flash drives around, one encrypted, one not? Since MS Windows has the forced limitation on USB flash drives that only the first partition can be mounted, 2 partitions (one encrypted, one not) is out of the question. Even it that was possible, I would be allocating a specific amount of space for encrypted and not, instead of them sharing the same storage capacity.

Please give this real consideration.

[t-d-k]

This has been asked for before. There are already programs for windows that can encrypt individual files, and DoxBox can be used with a file-based Box.
Using up the same amount of space regardless of how much is encrypted is a feature, because it means no-one can tell the amount of encrypted data.
So, I'm sorry, but I won't be implementing this; although if someone else did I could accept the patch.

[linux-modder]

Seconding the denial as ecryptfs is not considered a secure method anymore (short of bootstrapping gcrypt and mcrypt on top

[Redsandro]

EcryptFS is a hugely popular defacto file-based encryption system used in many linux products. Ubuntu encrypts your home directory by default with EcryptFS. What do you mean not considered a secure method? I haven't heard such a claim, please provide a source.

Secondly, a large group of users are solely interested in a Windows program that can read Linux encryption.

For disk-based encryption, the standard is LUKS(1). For file-based encryption, the standard is EcryptFS(2). Right now, LibreCrypt is the only Windows tool that does (1). Nothing does (2). If you do both, you got yourself a popular go-to tool.

I think a read-only experimental feature would be popular.

[jdevora]

linux'modder: Are you sure you are mistaking it with the fuse based EncFS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EncFS) that have been dormant for many years ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECryptfs on the contrary, is active and is included in the Linux kernel

[linux-modder]

I was sorry, I use ECryptfs myself and will be working to get full support
in librecrypt for it yes

Corey W Sheldon

Freelance IT Consultant, Multi-Discipline Tutor(p) 310.909.7672

pub 3072D/718BF597
http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xE958C5D6718BF597 2014-12-08
Key fingerprint = 2930 99EB 083D D332 0752 88C4 E958 C5D6 718B F597

uid Corey Sheldon (Fedora Key) sheldon.corey@gmail.com

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:06 AM, JuanDavi Evora Hanggi <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

linux'modder: Are you sure you are mistaking it with the fuse based EncFS (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EncFS) that have been dormant for many years
?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECryptfs on the contrary, is active and is
included in the Linux kernel

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#13 (comment).

[Redsandro]

That sounds positive. Is it too early to get rid of that wontfix label? 😉

[linux-modder]

I'M cool with yanking the wont fix bu im out of office today and tomorrow
t-d-k could you possibly do that
On Jun 8, 2015 8:42 PM, "Sander AKA Redsandro" notifications@github.com
wrote:

That sounds positive. Is it too early to get rid of that wontfix label? [image:
😉]

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#13 (comment).

[Redsandro]

Don't worry, the label is trivial. The news is good tho!

[linux-modder]

I will try to get on intregration late this week
On Jun 9, 2015 12:48 PM, "Sander AKA Redsandro" notifications@github.com
wrote:

Don't worry, the label is trivial. The news is good tho!

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#13 (comment).

[alexforencich]

Why not use encfs and http://encfsmp.sourceforge.net/ ?

[Redsandro]

Because no one uses encfs and there is no reason to support it.

Contrary to ecryptfs, which is the default encryption file system in Ubuntu/Arch/Mint/Debian, so basically 95% of the Linux desktop market share would find that their encrypted drives become readable from within Windows if LibreCrypt would support this.

[CurtisLeeBolin]

@alexforencich, I was discouraged from using encfs due to this report[1], but thank you for trying to find a solution for me.

[1]https://defuse.ca/audits/encfs.htm

[alexforencich]

My point is that encfsmp supports mounting encfs on windows and MAC. Besides, I prefer encfs to ecryptfs as encfs works with fuse so doesn't require root for mounting and unmounting, supports reverse mounting which is useful for backups via rsync, and does not add 8k to every single file.

[CurtisLeeBolin]

FUSE is another reason I have avoided it. FUSE seems to have an inherent problem of ridiculous overhead. With ecryptfs I am getting identical IO rates as with the filesystem hosting the ecryptfs. @alexforencich, I do appreciate your suggestion.