Merge branch 'master' of ssh://git-annex.branchable.com

3 files changed, 39 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/bugs/git-annex-shell:_gcryptsetup_permission_denied/comment_6_76ccdf0542e76e4dbd61f3b3228d40ba._comment b/doc/bugs/git-annex-shell:_gcryptsetup_permission_denied/comment_6_76ccdf0542e76e4dbd61f3b3228d40ba._comment
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..0ad9768f6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/bugs/git-annex-shell:_gcryptsetup_permission_denied/comment_6_76ccdf0542e76e4dbd61f3b3228d40ba._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="http://joeyh.name/"
+ ip="209.250.56.47"
+ subject="comment 6"
+ date="2013-11-04T17:12:05Z"
+ content="""
+It's entirely normal for `git annex get --from remote` to skip files that it does not think are present on the remote. 
+
+What does `git annex whereis` say?
+"""]]
diff --git a/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_10_4440a80d64c60c7312d5c405d54e607a._comment b/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_10_4440a80d64c60c7312d5c405d54e607a._comment
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..4ee70bcd7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_10_4440a80d64c60c7312d5c405d54e607a._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="tanen"
+ ip="83.128.159.25"
+ subject="comment 10"
+ date="2013-11-04T17:58:36Z"
+ content="""
+> \"We could symetrically encrypt the repository with a keyfile that's stored in the repository itself\"
+> Then you would need to decrypt the repository in order get the key you need to decrypt the repository. The impossibility of this design is why I didn't do that!
+
+Sorry, I ment that the file containing the symmetric encryption key should obviously not be used to encrypt itself, it would be stored in the repository \"unencrypted\" (but protected with a passphrase)
+
+> store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repsitory encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
+
+Exactly. I think such a mode be a great addition. It might not be as secure as encryption based on a private key - depending on the passphrase strength -, but it would certainly be a lot more convenient and portable (and still much more secure than the shared encryption method).
+"""]]
diff --git a/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_9_3784e0c828cd60b6a9075c2d32d070cc._comment b/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_9_3784e0c828cd60b6a9075c2d32d070cc._comment
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..15f807616
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/tips/fully_encrypted_git_repositories_with_gcrypt/comment_9_3784e0c828cd60b6a9075c2d32d070cc._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="http://joeyh.name/"
+ ip="209.250.56.47"
+ subject="comment 9"
+ date="2013-11-04T17:07:55Z"
+ content="""
+\"We could symetrically encrypt the repository with a keyfile that's stored in the repository itself\"
+
+Then you would need to decrypt the repository in order get the key you need to decrypt the repository. The impossibility of this design is why I didn't do that!
+
+It would certianly be possible to store a non-encrypted gpg key alongside the repsitory encrypted with it, but then you have to rely on a passphrase for all your security.
+
+You should file a bug report for the bug you saw..
+"""]]