Project

General

Profile

Bug #15630

Feature #14468: Add VeraCrypt support to Tails

Feature #15214: Iteration 1: Support unlocking VeraCrypt partitions in GNOME

GNOME Shell unlock dialog fails silently if udisks doesn't support PIM

Added by segfault about 1 year ago. Updated 12 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
-
Category:
-
Target version:
Start date:
05/31/2018
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:
Starter:
Affected tool:

Description

The VeraCrypt PIM is only supported in cryptsetup since the 2.0 version. If libblockdev was compiled with an older cryptsetup version, it will not support the PIM, and return an error to udisks.

When a PIM is used in the GNOME Disks unlock dialog, this error gets propagated, i.e. Disks opens an error dialog which contains the error message. But when a PIM is used in the GNOME Shell unlock dialog, it just fails silently.

History

#1 Updated by intrigeri 12 months ago

  • Target version changed from Tails_3.8 to Tails_3.9

#2 Updated by segfault 12 months ago

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (segfault)
  • Target version deleted (Tails_3.9)

Fixed with commit 90172484d241942f0a524de86105eed4c6a88658, which shows an error message in the GNOME Shell dialog in case that a PIM was used but udisks doesn't support it.

#3 Updated by intrigeri 12 months ago

  • Target version set to Tails_3.9
  • Parent task set to #15214

segfault wrote:

Fixed with commit 90172484d241942f0a524de86105eed4c6a88658, which shows an error message in the GNOME Shell dialog in case that a PIM was used but udisks doesn't support it.

FTR that's https://gitlab.gnome.org/segfault3/gnome-shell/commit/90172484d241942f0a524de86105eed4c6a88658 which is now an orphan commit. I think https://gitlab.gnome.org/segfault3/gnome-shell/commit/83cd443a8cc103ad2917cbb71860fd59399c9ed8 is the latest version. I'll check that this is included in the packages proposed for #14481 and #15521.

#4 Updated by intrigeri 12 months ago

intrigeri wrote:

I'll check that this is included in the packages proposed for #14481 and #15521.

All right!

Also available in: Atom PDF