I was on the point of making the same exact remark.
There's for sure a minor information leak (knowing the actual size of a sparse
file), but I fail to understand how an attacker could possibly take advantage
of that, in the (IMHO) highly unlikely event that she is able to steal your
backup tap
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 09:03:34PM +0200, Radosław Korzeniewski wrote:
> I think it is not possible to properly handle encrypted sparse data blocks
> without compromising security. The main data block size is 64kB long, so
> encrypted block should be more than 64kB long. Now, if we have a sparse
>
Hello,
2013/4/7 Alberto Caporro
> Hi Marcin,
>
> you're right, disabling encryption solved the issue. I'll both point out
> the lack in documentation and ask for an improvement on this.
>
>
I think it is not possible to properly handle encrypted sparse data blocks
without compromising security.
2013/4/7 Alberto Caporro
>
> Hi Marcin,
>
> you're right, disabling encryption solved the issue. I'll both point out the
> lack in documentation and ask for an improvement on this.
Hi Alberto,
Great. That's very kind of you :)
Regards.
Marcin Haba (gani)
---
Hi Marcin,
you're right, disabling encryption solved the issue. I'll both point out the
lack in documentation and ask for an improvement on this.
Thank you so much,
Alberto
- Original Message -
From: "ganiuszka"
To: "Alberto Caporro"
Cc: "Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net"
