On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 20:45:35 CET, Arno Wagner wrote: > On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 16:44:02 CET, Milan Broz wrote: [...] > > > The reply/revert attack possibility without support of specific hw will > > be still there but I would say even if we can provide method how to detect > > random corruption of sectors it could be useful. > > From my experience with larger storage systems, I doubt that. > The disks do an excellent job of detecting sector corruption > themselves these days. And even before, a defective CPU or RAM > was much more likely the cause of data corruption than an > undetected read error on disk. > > As it is basically free with authenticated encryption, it may > still have some use though. Come to think of it, with iSCSI and Network Block Devices, detecting corruption if the dm-crypt layer does not run on the machine the disks are in makes quite a bit of sense, even if it ends up detecting bus, controller and memory problems and not disk problems. One application of iSCSI is exporting a volume from a slow-CPU NAS and then doing LUKS/dm-crypt on a machine with good CPU power but little space for disks. Will in any case be interesting to see how much this does cost in terms of performance in the real world. Regards, Arno -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: arno@xxxxxxxxxxx GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718 ---- A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -- Plato If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
