From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A3A71FF135 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:08:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3EE041753B; Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:08:21 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: c.ebner@proxmox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup v3 30/30] docs: add section describing server side encryption for sync jobs Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2026 22:42:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20260419210610.3915597-12-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260414125923.892345-31-c.ebner@proxmox.com> References: <20260419210610.3915597-1-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1776632781173 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.002 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: 2YI4AR6A7T3MUXUTCZXCWF7B2NWFM55F X-Message-ID-Hash: 2YI4AR6A7T3MUXUTCZXCWF7B2NWFM55F X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 14.04.26 um 14:59 schrieb Christian Ebner: > diff --git a/docs/managing-remotes.rst b/docs/managing-remotes.rst > > +.. note:: Encryption key handling comes with a few risks, especially with key > + rotatiton. s/rotatiton/rotation/ > +For example, below command would assign ``key`` > +as the new active encryption key and ``key0,key2,key3`` as associated keys for > +the sync job. > + > +.. code-block:: console > + > + # proxmox-backup-manager sync-job update pbs2-push --active-encryption-key key1 --associated-key key2 --associated-key key3 The text says "key" but the command uses "key1". Also, the associated keys are listed as "key0,key2,key3" but key0 doesn't appear in the command arguments. I think the implicit rollover of the previous active key into the associated list needs to be spelled out more explicitly here, otherwise devs might be slightly confused about where key0 comes from when reading this.