4 ms·
Interesting. But I'd think openzfs native encryption would be preferable in most use-cases?
by e12e 5y ago
Interesting. But I'd think openzfs native encryption would be preferable in most use-cases?
- gorkish 5y agoI have some archive data stored on GELI drives; this is a welcome development. Yes, ZFS has encryption, but it comes necessarily along with the rest of ZFS. GELI is a much more straightforward way to deliver an encrypted block device compared to an encrypted Zvol.
- e12e 5y ago> I have some archive data stored on GELI drives; this is a welcome development. Sure, I have a few luks encrypted drives (having run Linux, not freebsd). But I'm inclined to move them over to zfs. > GELI is a much more straightforward way to deliver an encrypted block device compared to an encrypted Zvol. Maybe if you need an encrypted block device - but with zfs in Linux and freebsd as standard, experimental support on windows, Mac - I'm not sure I agree geli/cryptsetup is an easier way to deliver an encrypted (at rest) filesystem. More to the point - between experimental geli support on Linux, and stable zfs on Linux and freebsd - I would strongly prefer zfs. (or freebsd and geli for accessing archives that are tricky to move over to zfs for some reason).
- RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u 5y agoFreeBSD's geli is more similar to Linux's dm-crypt. Of course with (Open)ZFS native encryption finally available for both FreeBSD and Linux, you could also compare them to zvols.
- vetrom 5y agodon't forget ecryptfs, which is what drives android storage encryption most of the time.