[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [solved securely now??] What is the correct way to set encrypted swap with systemd?



On 20150402_1142-0500, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Paul E Condon (pecondon@mesanetworks.net):
> > I read the prior discussion as taking for granted the idea that one
> > must have only one method of identifying individual partitions,
>   ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^
> If you're referring to my post (which you quoted), then the opposite
> is true. The opening paragraphs argues against LABELs as a panacea,
> but later ones (and another posting in this thread) reveal that I use
> them routinely in what are the right circumstances for me.
> 
> (With top-posting, it can be difficult to tell precisely what you're
> commenting on.) It applied to the whole conversation. At least that
>                 was my intent.
> > and
> > that that method must be the latest to have arrived on the scene. For
> > example, if everyone else in the world accepts your idea that
> > LABEL=sda1 on the partition that was /dev/sda1 when Debian was
> > installed is something that should *not*be*done*, *then* I can be very
> > confident that my disk will not cause problems *because*of*an*identity*
> > *clash*.
> 
> That may be true for you personally, but your idea scales up to just
> one computer. I have several. So do many others. Any time your LABEL is
> "correct", it's redundant, and when it's made "incorrect" by changing
> circumstances, it's confusing.
> 
> > The whole scenario is false anyway. Who would let a disk
> > arrives at his facility in the hands of a stranger be *mount*ed
> > without first putting it in a USB disk carrier and using some system
> > tools to take a look at what is recorded on it?  And why would I offer
> > my disk to anyone without *telling* them how it is labeled?
> 
> Facility? Stranger? In my post I suggested that any one person, who
> had taken your advice and LABELled their root partition as "sda1",
> might take said drive out of that computer and put it into another one
> of theirs, whereupon /dev/disk/by-label will have an entry like this:
> 
> /dev/disk/by-label:
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Mar 31 13:44 sda1 -> ../../sdb1
> 
> Confusing, unnecessary, avoidable.

  To me, very informative of a situation that badly needs fixing by
  other means.

>
> > I see the argument here, mine as well as yours, as a clash of wildly
> > imaginative false scenarios. 
> 
> Summarising: names/labels are important. Advising sda1 as a LABEL is
> not a good idea.
> 
> If you want a reference, take a look at RFC1178, page 2:
> "Don't overload other terms already in common use."

Like, for instance, 'window' ? When was the first use of the word,
window, in English according to the OED? How many years was it in
common use as referring to a common architectural feature of human
habitations? And earlier than OED, there is Dr. Johnson's Dictionary
of the English Language, which provides a definition of 'window' that
was current in 1755, over two centuries before the UNIX epoch.

And then there's Humpty Dumpty's Rule for the definition of any word
to consider. ;-)

Cheers, and
Peace,
-- 
Paul E Condon           
pecondon@mesanetworks.net


Reply to: