I’m setting up FDE and wonders which one is better. “LVM over LUKS” or “LUKS over LVM”? Or something else? Does one is definitely better then the other? What are your preference?

Thanks.

  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m planning FDE on my laptop which have 2 drives. I originally plan to use LUKS on LVM as I can use LVM to join two drives into one. But now I wonders if my choice is right.

    • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      That works too, if you have a use case go for it. There’s so many valid ways to arrange your disks.

      LUKS over LVM over 2 disks is as valid as LVM over 2x LUKS which is as valid as LVM over LUKS over RAID1. Although with multiple disks I’d probably go with filesystem mirroring with btrfs or ZFS, and give it the two LUKS volumes. That way you get per file chunk checksums and self healing if your drives start to drift off (RAID won’t tell you if either disk returns garbage, and has no way of telling which disk has the correct data).

      But really, I wouldn’t worry about LVM metadata unless you’re holding some seriously sensitive and valuable data. I can’t think of a use case where LVM metadata would be bad but not LUKS headers. Like the only information really leaking is the name of the volume and how big it is, so unless you happen to have a dedicated volume full of secret documents of a known size and that can be used as evidence of you being in possession based on the size alone, it’s kinda eh.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        So you mean BTRFS over LUKS? I will have a try on a VM later, plus the ZFS too. Thanks for the advice.