Fix: conflict between Raw64 and PlaintextNames flags in config #212
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When creating a new volume with
PlaintextNamesenabled, the generated configuration file (gocryptfs.conf) incorrectly sets theRaw64flag.Raw64(Base64 encoding for filenames) andPlaintextNames(no filename encryption) are mutually exclusive in gocryptfs, and enabling both causes compatibility issues.The Issue (Before Fix)
Currently, creating a config with
PlaintextNamesresults in the following conflicting flags:The Fix
I modified
CryptConfig::createto explicitly disable theRaw64flag whenPlaintextNamesis active. This ensures cppcryptfs generates configuration files that are compatible with gocryptfs validation rules.I used
m_PlaintextNamesinstead of the function argument to correctly respect the precedence logic (e.g., the EMENames check) defined earlier in the function.Verification (After Fix)
After applying the fix, the generated configuration file is clean and correct:
Verified that gocryptfs now recognizes and mounts the volume without errors.