blob: d5461e23c096b664765463900d36507e9f6cacb6 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
|
[[!comment format=mdwn
username="http://joey.kitenet.net/"
nickname="joey"
subject="comment 2"
date="2011-04-05T18:41:49Z"
content="""
I see no use case for verifying encrypted object files w/o access to the encryption key. And possible use cases for not allowing anyone to verify your data.
If there are to be multiple encryption keys usable within a single encrypted remote, than they would need to be given some kind of name (a since symmetric key is used, there is no pubkey to provide a name), and the name encoded in the files stored in the remote. While certainly doable I'm not sold that adding a layer of indirection is worthwhile. It only seems it would be worthwhile if setting up a new encrypted remote was expensive to do. Perhaps that could be the case for some type of remote other than S3 buckets.
"""]]
|
