update
This commit is contained in:
parent
dbe41e667b
commit
8c9d9eb8af
1 changed files with 4 additions and 2 deletions
|
@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ as well as the filenames. The size of the encrypted files, and access
|
|||
patterns of the data, should be the only clues to what type of is stored in
|
||||
such a remote.
|
||||
|
||||
[[!toc]]
|
||||
|
||||
## encryption backends
|
||||
|
||||
It makes sense to support multiple encryption backends. So, there
|
||||
|
@ -94,7 +96,7 @@ for each file in the repository, contact the encrypted remote to check
|
|||
if it has the file. This can be done without enumeration, although it will
|
||||
mean running gpg once per file fscked, to get the encrypted filename.
|
||||
|
||||
### risks
|
||||
## risks
|
||||
|
||||
A risk of this scheme is that, once the symmetric cipher has been obtained, it
|
||||
allows full access to all the encrypted content. This scheme does not allow
|
||||
|
@ -108,6 +110,6 @@ amelorates these type of risks by using locked memory.
|
|||
This design does not support obfuscating the size of files by chunking
|
||||
them, as that would have added a lot of complexity, for dubious benefits.
|
||||
If the untrusted party running the encrypted remote wants to know file sizes,
|
||||
they could correlate chunks that are accessed together. Enctypting data
|
||||
they could correlate chunks that are accessed together. Encrypting data
|
||||
changes the original file size enough to avoid it being used as a direct
|
||||
fingerprint at least.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue