Contributed by sean on from the an encrypted swap isn't going far enough off the deep end dept.
A walkthrough and howto of how OpenBSD 3.6 was used to create an encrypted Samba server, including a web interface to manage BitTorrent collections, using the 3.6 package collection and the TorrentFlux-interface.
From the website "This is a fully-encrypted (samba)fileserver, which means that all the data that’s on there, actually can’t be found physically on the server :-) To be more precise, the data you copy to the server gets encrypted and the data you read from it gets decrypted, all on-the-fly…"
The write up and how-to is found at Making an encrypted fileserver.
I've only used the vnd devices for mounting and testing media images so this is a particularly interesting use for this flexible pseduo-device.
(Comments are closed)
By ViPER (213.84.93.41) viper@dmrt.net on http://www.dmrt.net
Great article :)
By Anonymous Coward (66.131.207.182) on
Comments
By Jonas (213.114.206.82) on
Comments
By RC (4.8.16.53) on
By Archite (69.238.133.30) adam@akarsoft.com on D. Adam Karim
Comments
By tedu (64.173.147.27) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (213.89.220.64) on
By Jim (69.177.150.45) on
Comments
By RC (4.8.16.53) on
Actually, you can fsck an svnd device. I just did it on 3.6. Now, being encrypted may be a different matter.
By Otto (82.197.192.49) otto@drijf.net on
By Ely (68.229.23.47) on
"Now you can go off and, for example, configure Samba to share this volume in a windows-network ..."
That's all it says about setting up Samba. Not exactly a walkthrough!
Comments
By sean (139.142.208.98) on
I should have pointed out that the intesting part was the encrypting of the drives as the rest is 'run of the mill.'
Comments
By kokamomi (83.227.181.37) on
By Brian (205.161.1.46) on
Maybe I'm missing something..?
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (198.110.83.83) on
Comments
By Brian (205.161.1.46) on
Seriously, why?
Comments
By Jonas (213.114.206.82) on
By Chris (24.76.170.207) on
This is the same mentality that has people using PGP even though it's moderately more irritating than just sending email. I don't see how it's an irrational one.
To state this more succinctly: What do I have to hide? Everything! And none of your business!
By RC (4.8.16.53) on
It doesn't matter, though. You don't need a life-or-death reason to want encryption... Perhaps you just don't want anyone to be able to recover your files in the event that your hard drive suddenly crashes and you have to send it in. Any reason at all is good enough.
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (131.202.168.108) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (65.167.23.134) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (131.202.168.108) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (66.93.216.162) on
Comments
By pat (80.218.139.214) on
By Anonymous Coward (203.13.2.142) on
By RC (4.8.16.53) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (69.197.92.181) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (80.135.238.182) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (69.197.92.181) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (80.135.255.241) on
fsck cannot repair all errors. I think less errors to repair are better.
oh, and fsck'ing e.g. a 300GB partition still takes some time.
By rene (138.217.103.42) on
By Sky (159.149.70.77) darksky@despammed.com on
Comments
By j. (80.108.115.184) on
Comments
By cod3fr3ak (207.87.24.14) on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (67.34.129.203) on
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:FEuW8-5qs_cJ:pooh.selwerd.nl:81/index.php%3Fid%3D84+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
I don't see anything in there that wasn't already covered in the previously mentioned filesystem encryption HOWTO though (except for the mention of samba, etc.) Was there anything new in there related to encryption? Maybe I missed it...
By Anonymous Coward (212.20.172.166) on
By Hannes (81.233.16.116) on