Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:12:03 +0100
From:      "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Max Laier <max@love2party.net>
Cc:        Daniel Thiele <dthiele@gmx.net>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, shaun@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Support for geli onetime encryption for /tmp?
Message-ID:  <20091213111202.GA1309@frankie.nitro.dk>
In-Reply-To: <200912130032.54740.max@love2party.net>
References:  <4B24143E.2060803@gmx.net> <20091212224052.GF1417@arthur.nitro.dk> <200912130032.54740.max@love2party.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2009.12.13 00:32:54 +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> On Saturday 12 December 2009 23:40:53 Simon L. Nielsen wrote:
> > On 2009.12.12 23:07:58 +0100, Daniel Thiele wrote:
> > > Is there maybe another way to achieve onetime /tmp encryption that
> > > I am missing? Preferably one that does not involve huge changes to
> > 
> > Well, I use the simple one - make /tmp a memory file system.  locate
> > is sometimes not too happy with an e.g. 50MB /tmp, but otherwise it
> > works very well for me.
> > 
> > [simon@arthur:~] grep tmp /etc/rc.conf
> > tmpmfs="YES"
> > tmpsize="50M"
> 
> but tmpfs pages are swappable IIRC.  This would mean that the data might end 
> up unencrypted on secondary storage.

Well, above is tmp_m_fs, which is just UFS on md(4) devices.  But that
can also be swapped out, so that's one reason I encrypt swap.  If you
care enough to encrypt /tmp you should also encrypt swap anyway.

I never looked at tmpfs, as I heard that it isn't really stable yet.

-- 
Simon L. Nielsen



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091213111202.GA1309>