From: Michael Halcrow Subject: Re: [CRYPTO] is it really optimized ? Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 10:31:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20070415153147.GD18988@halcrow.us> References: <38b2ab8a0704140615y2ba8145bmd3c2316a41d99265@mail.gmail.com> <20070414194434.GA18988@halcrow.us> Reply-To: Michael Halcrow Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Herbert Xu , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Satyam Sharma Return-path: Received: from nlpi015.sbcis.sbc.com ([207.115.36.44]:26547 "EHLO nlpi015.sbcis.sbc.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752817AbXDOPkO (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:40:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 08:01:24PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > I might be answering myself here, but clearly, removing the > whitelist does not seem possible given the PGP-message-framework > eCryptfs was designed in. The whole cipher code thing is just posturing. eCryptfs could just as easily write the cipher string out to the metadata and then pass that verbatim to the crypto API on sys_open(). There's no hard-and-fast rule that dictates that eCryptfs absolutely has to write anything out to the metadata in any particular format. Mike