On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 18:59:09 CET, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Thu, 2019-01-03 at 18:36 +0100, Milan Broz wrote: > > We can (and want) to support both sides, just default should be on > > the secure side. > > Absolutely. :-) Which is why my opinion would be to keep discarding > TRIMs even in the future and with LUKS2 per default. I fully agree to that. Security requirements may vary (and I know "those" enterprise customers very well...), but secure-by-default is the right way to go. Lowering security is easy, basically anybody can do it. Increasing it is hard for most people and that is why it needs to be already there and why lowering it needs to be an active configuration decision. 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 https://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
