On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is where we should be going. Encryption is really irrelavent. The issue > should be if a removable device is inserted, who should have access to it > if it gets automounted. I would expect encrypted and unencrypted devices > to get the same treatment. The encrypted devices do already have a pop up, > so maybe that makes it not as much effort to ask a question when the device > is mounted. But I don't see otherwise why one would want to treat encrypted > and uncrypted removable devices differently. We don't know which of multiple users plugged the device in but we know which user provided the key to decrypt the device. The existence of encryption shows that the user may care more about the confidentiality of the data, and there is less of an previously existing "installed base" of expectations about how an encrypted volume works when you plug it in. If we wanted to get fancy (e.g. go beyond just a change in the default modes) additional users could authenticate themselves to an already mounted encrypted volume one at a time by providing the key. ::shrugs:: -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
