Bug 2427059
| Summary: | fuse-encfs missing in EPEL 10 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora EPEL | Reporter: | Peter Schiffer <peter+fedora> |
| Component: | fuse-encfs | Assignee: | Michel Lind <michel> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | epel10 | CC: | lemenkov, michel, riehecky, vascom2 |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | --- | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | Type: | Bug | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Peter Schiffer
2026-01-04 21:25:07 UTC
Hey Peter. I wouldn't recommend to build EncFS for EPEL. Its unmaintained for a while and original author suggests an alternative - gocryptfs. It is a modern successor to EncFS, offering better performance, active maintenance, and improved security (whereas EncFS has unaddressed vulnerabilities and is no longer actively developed). Please check if gocryptfs is available. Hello Peter, thank you for the feedback - in general I do agree that fuse-encfs should not be used anymore for new projects as better alternatives are available. However, for older, legacy systems, and for users with data already encrypted with encfs it would be beneficial to have fuse-encfs package available in the el10 as well (so they can upgrade the OS). Also, it's still available in Fedora, so building it for epel 10 shouldn't be too much hassle, I hope. Thanks for the consideration, peter |