From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DDB71FF13A for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2026 17:25:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 15B5118EE3; Wed, 15 Apr 2026 17:25:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4abb9ab8-b592-4504-9566-9c4e2fe41d31@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 17:25:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-backup v3 19/30] fix #7251: api: push: encrypt snapshots using configured encryption key To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michael_K=C3=B6ppl?= , pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260414125923.892345-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com> <20260414125923.892345-20-c.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US, de-DE From: Christian Ebner In-Reply-To: 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: 1776266639454 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.069 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: SP77HU7XKQZYUZHPIZ7UBIFSAJUAVMOX X-Message-ID-Hash: SP77HU7XKQZYUZHPIZ7UBIFSAJUAVMOX 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 4/15/26 4:47 PM, Michael Köppl wrote: > On Tue Apr 14, 2026 at 2:59 PM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote: > > [snip] > >> let mut encrypt_using_key = None; >> + if params.crypt_config.is_some() { >> + // Check if snapshot is fully encrypted or not encrypted at all: >> + // refuse progress otherwise to upload partially unencrypted contents or mix encryption key. >> + let files = source_manifest.files(); >> + let all_unencrypted = files >> + .iter() >> + .all(|f| f.chunk_crypt_mode() == CryptMode::None); >> + let any_unencrypted = files >> + .iter() >> + .any(|f| f.chunk_crypt_mode() == CryptMode::None); >> + >> + if all_unencrypted { >> + encrypt_using_key = params.crypt_config.clone(); >> + info!("Encrypt and push unencrypted snapshot '{snapshot}'"); > > nit: Might just be me, but to me this reads like it would encrypt the > snapshot and then just push the unencrypted one. Perhaps something like > "Encrypt and push previously unencrypted snapshot"? True, now that you mention it I cannot unsee it. But maybe even better: "Encrypt source snapshot '{}' on the fly while pushing to remote"? > >> + } else if any_unencrypted { >> + warn!("Encountered partially encrypted snapshot '{snapshot}', refuse to re-encrypt and skip"); >> + return Ok(stats); >> + } else { >> + info!("Pushing already encrypted snapshot '{snapshot}' without re-encryption"); >> + } >> + } > > [snip]