Stupid Symantec

[Steven Maddox]

On 15/03/18 17:03, Phil Susi wrote:
> Windows has this feature built in already, why not just use that?

I'm not a Windows user, I mentioned that I'm a Linux desktop user in my
original post.

--

On 15/03/18 17:11, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
> The obvious approach would be to write a FUSE driver

Yeah this would be a cool approach that'd mean less reliance on the
kernel.  However the files we (me and my colleagues) access (although
they're all using Windows PCs) are on SMB/Windows shares... so somehow
the overlay would have to work with that.

--

On 15/03/18 17:11, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
> I saw a commercial product here that might do what you want

I'll take a closer look thanks... although on first glance I can't see
anything about SMB/Windows share support (for remote files it just
mentions SSH).

--

On 15/03/18 22:39, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> you could look into ext4's native encryption features

and...

On 16/03/18 00:58, gnupg at raf.org wrote:
> luks full disk encryption would be best

Yeah I just use LUKS on my PC to protect local files, but this is (as
above) for files on SMB/Windows shares... sorry for not mentioning that
sooner.

--

Any other ideas welcome :)

To be honest I was kind of hoping someone would pop up an say there was
a PGP-compatible open source alternative kernel module that did the same
thing!  Perhaps this was something the PGP guys kept closed source and
Symantec have continued to keep it that way since they bought them out?

--
Steven Maddox
Lantizia