lubuntu-qa team mailing list archive

[Nio Wiklund <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Saqman,

What is your opinion about encrypted disk and encrypted home?

Best regards
Nio

Den 2015-03-04 19:33, Istimsak Abdulbasir skrev:
> I agree that the "install alongside" option can be replaced by manual
> partitioning. That is of course it is a method that a beginner to Linux
> would understand. However, the risk of overwriting something would be to
> high. We should keep the first option and test it not that it works but
> for areas that can be improved.
> 
> As for manual partition testing and encryption, both are vital. However,
> encryption will be used if the system is being deployed in an enterprise
> environment. Linux experts I have luckly communicated with highly
> charish RedHat. Just a suggestion, we could make the encryption testcase
> optional. We are not forced to test it but it is still there.
> 
> On Mar 4, 2015 12:30 PM, "Nio Wiklund" <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     [replying at the end]
>     Den 2015-03-04 18:11, Brendan Perrine skrev:
>     > On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 08:57:41 -0800
>     > Walter Lapchynski <wxl@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wxl@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     >
>     >> I'd say if Ubuntu in general considers it an edge case, it
>     probably is.
>     >>
>     >> @wxl
>     >> Lubuntu Release Manager, Head of QA
>     >> Ubuntu PPC Point of Contact
>     >> Ubuntu Oregon Team Leader
>     >> On Mar 4, 2015 8:54 AM, "Nio Wiklund" <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> Hi again,
>     >>>
>     >>> I want to add:
>     >>>
>     >>> 1. I really think we should have a test-case for 'Encrypted LVM'
>     >>>
>     >>> 2. I can think of situations, when 'Encrypted home' is a better
>     >>> alternative. We can add such a test-case, if the Lubuntu users
>     think it
>     >>> is important.
>     >>>
>     >>> As it is now, these two test-cases would be independent, because
>     it does
>     >>> no longer work with them in combination. If it is important, we
>     can ask
>     >>> the developers to fix the bug(s) so that the original alternate
>     >>> test-case works again.
>     >>>
>     >>> Best regards
>     >>> Nio
>     >>>
>     >>> Den 2015-03-04 17:24, Nio Wiklund skrev:
>     >>>> Hi Walter,
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Encrypted LVM is *the* test-case in all other Ubuntu flavours
>     including
>     >>>> Ubuntu server. I really think we should test it, not only LVM.
>     >>>> 'Encrypted disk' is implemented via LVM.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Lubuntu is a special case with 'encrypted LVM', and inside it
>     'encrypted
>     >>>> home'. What I suggest is to remove 'encrypted home' from the
>     test-case.
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Best regards
>     >>>> Nio
>     >>>>
>     >>>> Den 2015-03-04 17:15, Walter Lapchynski skrev:
>     >>>>> I agree there's no reason to wait for desktop to implement the
>     change to
>     >>>>> alternate.  I do, however want to emphasize that encryption is
>     more
>     >>>>> valuable to the average user than LVM.  Maybe we should
>     separate these
>     >>>>> testcases for now? Then at some point in the future, we could
>     create a
>     >>>>> combined one.  Or is encrypted LVM a really unique case?
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> @wxl
>     >>>>> Lubuntu Release Manager, Head of QA
>     >>>>> Ubuntu PPC Point of Contact
>     >>>>> Ubuntu Oregon Team Leader
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> On Mar 4, 2015 8:05 AM, "Nio Wiklund" <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>
>     >>>>> <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>>>
>     wrote:
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     Den 2015-03-04 14:38, Lars Noodén skrev:
>     >>>>>     > On 04.03.2015 14:50, Nio Wiklund wrote:
>     >>>>>     >> Hi Walter, Lars, Phill and all other Lubuntu users
>     >>>>>     >>
>     >>>>>     >> I think we have a working alternative, that should be
>     rather
>     >>> easy to
>     >>>>>     >> implement for the Alternate Install (Encryption)
>     test-cases (for
>     >>> the
>     >>>>>     >> i386 as well as the amd64 iso files).
>     >>>>>     >>
>     >>>>>     >> @ Walter and Lars: Can we agree to modify the (alternate)
>     >>> test-cases?
>     >>>>>     >>
>     >>>>>     >> @ Lars: ... and when agreed, will you edit the alternate
>     >>> test-cases?
>     >>>>>     >>
>     >>>>>     >> @ Walter and Lars: The next step will be to design
>     corresponding
>     >>>>>     >> test-cases for the Lubuntu desktop iso files.
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     > Hi,
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     > I can try modifying the Alternate encryption case, if
>     someone can
>     >>>>>     remind
>     >>>>>     > me of the URL to the right guide to do that, when the time
>     >>> comes.  The
>     >>>>>     > hard part is not the HTML but dealing with bazaar and then
>     >>>>>     following the
>     >>>>>     > right procedure for a pull.  Would that be for 15.04 or
>     for 15.10?
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>
>     >>>
>     http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-testcase/ubuntu-manual-tests/trunk/files/head:/testcases/image/
>     <http://bazaar.launchpad.net/%7Eubuntu-testcase/ubuntu-manual-tests/trunk/files/head:/testcases/image/>
>     >>>>>     <
>     >>>
>     http://bazaar.launchpad.net/%7Eubuntu-testcase/ubuntu-manual-tests/trunk/files/head:/testcases/image/
>     >>>>
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     > For 16.04, it would be best if the installers handled
>     encryption
>     >>>>>     > properly so that workarounds like dropping to the shell
>     are not
>     >>> needed
>     >>>>>     > for full disk encryption.
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     >> ...
>     >>>>>     >> @ everybody:
>     >>>>>     >>
>     >>>>>     >> Skipping 'encrypted home inside encrypted disk with
>     LVM' makes
>     >>> things
>     >>>>>     >> much easier to get working. ...
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     > Encrypted home is probably important if there are
>     multiple users
>     >>>>>     or one
>     >>>>>     > user with multiple roles on the machine.  For the full
>     hard disk
>     >>>>>     > encryption I see a main use-case as being work laptops that
>     >>> travel and
>     >>>>>     > thus at risk of being lost or stolen.
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>     > Regards,
>     >>>>>     > /Lars
>     >>>>>     >
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     Hi Lars,
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     1. I hope we can agree very soon about the alternate
>     encryption
>     >>>>>     test-cases, and do it for 15.04, but I can fully
>     understand, that
>     >>> Walter
>     >>>>>     or some other important persons may want to wait and think
>     twice
>     >>> before
>     >>>>>     changing these test-cases.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     2. What I suggested today does not imply any dropping to a
>     shell.
>     >>>>>     Without encrypted home the alternate test-cases will be
>     smooth. But
>     >>> I'm
>     >>>>>     waiting for someone (you, Lars?) to verify my test results.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     3. I agree that 'Encrypted home' is important if there are
>     multiple
>     >>>>>     users or one user with multiple roles on the machine. But
>     must it be
>     >>>>>     combined with encrypted disk and LVM?
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     4. I think creating the corresponding test-cases for the
>     desktop
>     >>>>>     installer needs more time, but modifying the alternate
>     test-cases
>     >>> need
>     >>>>>     not wait for the desktop ones to be ready for publishing.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>     Best regards
>     >>>>>     Nio
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     > I also conisder that manual partitioning would be more important
>     as I would want to employ that in production as a user more often
>     than encryption because I don't want to lose my own data if I lose
>     the key.
>     >
>     Hi Brendan,
> 
>     I think both manual partitioning and encryption are important. We have a
>     manual partitioning test-case for the Lubuntu desktop installers. I
>     think both are worthwhile.
> 
>     If I have to rank the test-cases and skip the least valuable one, I
>     would skip 'install alongside'. Users at the Ubuntu Forums have big
>     problems because of that option (overwriting Windows), and several
>     people (including the installer guru Oldfred) warn about it. The worst
>     bugs are squashed now, but in order to control installations for dual
>     booting, we really need the manual method alias 'Something else'.
> 
>     On the other hand, it is important that 'install alongside' works as
>     well as possible, because it will affect beginners. So it is important
>     that it is tested too.
> 
>     Best regards
>     Nio
> 
>     --
>     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa
>     <https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-qa>
>     Post to     : lubuntu-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:lubuntu-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa
>     <https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-qa>
>     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>