From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C00291FF141
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2026 09:10:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 604F9199E6;
	Mon, 13 Apr 2026 09:11:36 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <3dd306b0-55aa-4ea5-88c2-ee966f6292d5@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 09:11:02 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox{,-backup} v2 00/27] fix #7251: implement server
 side encryption support for push sync jobs
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
References: <20260411085154.1961287-1-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US, de-DE
From: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260411085154.1961287-1-t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2
X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1776064189002
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
	AWL                     0.068 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
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED  0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked.  See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED  0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked.  See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
	RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED  0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to
 Validity was blocked.  See
 https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more
 information.
	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: HRL2L6F6IEF36R672LBC4WBN7FVMSDW5
X-Message-ID-Hash: HRL2L6F6IEF36R672LBC4WBN7FVMSDW5
X-MailFrom: c.ebner@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
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:pbs-devel-owner@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:pbs-devel-join@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:pbs-devel-leave@lists.proxmox.com>

On 4/11/26 10:50 AM, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Thanks for the rework, good progress overall.
> 
> AFAICT, the pull guard against overwriting previously-decrypted snapshots has
> an inverted condition - see my reply on patch 27.
> 
> The archive_key handler should check for active push job references like
> delete_key does, and creating a push job with an archived key should fail at
> config time, not at runtime (see patches 10/11).
> 
> No unarchive endpoint - if an admin accidentally archives a key, they have to
> edit the config file manually, can be fine, but should be at least documented.
> 
> More details in the per-patch replies.

Thanks a lot for the swift review and catching some more issues! Will 
send a version 3 as soon as possible to bring this forward.