From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CAEBFC8D for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 10:49:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BB84B15710 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 10:49:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 10:49:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D76AC43CFB for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2024 10:49:13 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 10:49:05 +0100 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20231207161038.90626-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20231207161038.90626-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20231207161038.90626-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.16.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1704793451.q4m7sde2g1.astroid@yuna.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.065 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 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC manager 1/1] ui: lvm: expose saferemove setting X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 09:49:14 -0000 On December 7, 2023 5:10 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote: > It can be security-relevant in some environments. The LVM storage > documentation can be reached via the "Help" button and contains a few > more details. > > Signed-off-by: Fiona Ebner > --- > www/manager6/storage/LVMEdit.js | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >=20 > diff --git a/www/manager6/storage/LVMEdit.js b/www/manager6/storage/LVMEd= it.js > index fde302fc..37d3c6ef 100644 > --- a/www/manager6/storage/LVMEdit.js > +++ b/www/manager6/storage/LVMEdit.js > @@ -228,5 +228,15 @@ Ext.define('PVE.storage.LVMInputPanel', { > uncheckedValue: 0, > fieldLabel: gettext('Shared'), > }, > + { > + xtype: 'proxmoxcheckbox', > + name: 'saferemove', > + uncheckedValue: 0, > + fieldLabel: gettext('Safe Remove'), > + autoEl: { > + tag: 'div', > + 'data-qtip': gettext("Zero-out data when removing LVs"), IMHO the option is a bit misnamed unfortunately ("Safe Remove" sounds like something I'd almost always enable - it's "safe" after all ;)). I am not sure how many users read the tooltips, one possible alternative would be to make the label sound more dangerous (or rather, use something there that implies it has a cost), and move the option name into the tooltip? maybe something like "Wipe removed volumes" could work? > + }, > + }, > ], > }); > --=20 > 2.39.2 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20