On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Nicolas Jungers <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/06/2010 10:32 PM, Alexander Samad wrote: >> >> But I would say on encryption and de duplication - why not leave that to >> the >> filesystem - stay focused on what rdiff-backup does best - differential >> backups, you can get de duplication, compression and encryption file >> systems >> why not leave it to them to do that (well atleast for linux and any os >> that >> accepts fuse filesystem). > > I don't know for de-duplication, but for encryption the filesystem solution > falls a bit short. > > Block device encryption doesn't allow to rsync the backup of site and > cryptfs doesn't support spare files (nor do rdiff-backup, but that shall be > addressed soon, right?). My memory is a bit fuzzy but I think I selected > cryptfs because it's the only solutions which (1) allows access to either > the crypt or uncrypt version of the files and (2) may leave the metadata > uncrypted. > > So yes, it's usable, just not optimal.
Nicolas, My rdiff-backup main repo is in a encfs filesystem. Encfs may not be a fully secure as other choices (I don't know), but it does allow rsync of the encrypted data to a remote site. (I do that). I have done test restores to a third machine and unencrypted my data via encfs on that machine. So if encfs is secure enough for you, it works fine with rdiff-backup. fyi: what is a "spare file"? Greg _______________________________________________ rdiff-backup-users mailing list at [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
