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 A51AB1FF146 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:57:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7E9E012FAF; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:57:03 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:56:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup] pull: decrypt: set and check change-detection-fingerprint To: =?UTF-8?Q?Fabian_Gr=C3=BCnbichler?= , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260428094437.596604-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE From: Christian Ebner In-Reply-To: <20260428094437.596604-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1777380892464 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.071 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: 7AC76A263SY3FRORW6CSXA7NR5QOAADQ X-Message-ID-Hash: 7AC76A263SY3FRORW6CSXA7NR5QOAADQ 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 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: On 4/28/26 11:43 AM, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > when decrypt-pulling a snapshot that was not created by encrypt-pushing, but by > a regular encrypted backup, resyncing requires matching the local plain text > manifest and the remote encrypted one. > > in addition to storing a signature of the plain manifest when encrypt-pushing, > store the already existing signature of the encrypted source manifest when > decrypt-pulling, but only use it for matching if the former does not exist. > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler > --- Can also confirm that this fixes the issue and looks good to me! Reviewed-by: Christian Ebner Signed-off-by: Christian Ebner