fusefs-cryptofs vs fusefs-cryptofs

[Matthew Seaman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 30/06/2010 17:11:22, Tim Gustafson wrote:

> I was wondering if anyone could offer any personal experience with
> using either fusefs-cryptofs or fusefs-cryptofs.
> 
> I'm going to be bringing a FreeBSD OpenLDAP server online soon and I
> need to have the contents of the OpenLDAP database encrypted in the
> event of a physical security breach, and so I need a reliable and
> efficient disk encryption scheme to handle that.  I was thinking of
> encrypting /var/db/openldap using either fusefs-cryptofs or
> fusefs-cryptofs, but I'm not sure which would be better to use for
> this sort of application.

On FreeBSD, this is spelled GELI (or GBDE, but I think geli is slightly
better).  Native filesystem level encryption -- rather more efficient
than something like fuse, needs no extra software installed, very
secure.  See

http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/disks-encrypting.html

	Cheers,

	Matthew

- -- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
JID: matthew at infracaninophile.co.uk               Kent, CT11 9PW
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkwrdH4ACgkQ8Mjk52CukIwA/QCfRO9PuHzVXQpoqNkrtob2WM07
fL8AmwRfLVE0fEVSGk1BZeMOnBxLW1t3
=jZk0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----