https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=436290
Ivan Čukić <ivan.cu...@kde.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REPORTED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |UPSTREAM
--- Comment #2 from Ivan Čukić <ivan.cu...@kde.org> ---
CryFS has some performance issues. This should be reported upstream again.
There is currently an open bug report for large volumes [1] where the comment
was that it might be slow because cryfs splits everything into 32k files
(though, on my system it looks like the default is 16k).
This could, I guess, be a valid reason for large volumes to be slow, but not
for the small ones.
It could be a solution to use the gocryptfs backend instead (had no slowness
reports in Vault yet for that one), or encfs if you don't plan to sync the data
to a cloud (I'm using encfs for ages now for several large volumes without any
issues).
@dauntless
Vaults have been designed to cover many-small-encrypted-containers instead of
the one-huge-container use-case.
If you want to keep all files on an encrypted drive, I'd advise to go for
full-disk encryption or something like Tomb [2].
At some point, I created a Tomb backend for Vaults, but never merged it as Tomb
requires some interaction with sudo which is a problem I haven't found a
satisfying solution to yet except forcing the user to edit sudoers to allow
running sudo tomb without entering a password.
[1] https://github.com/cryfs/cryfs/issues/346
[2] https://www.dyne.org/software/tomb/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
