git-crypt VS lnav

https://github.com/AGWA/git-crypt

And occasionally to encrypt files, or receive encrypted files.

These are practical things which are non-theoretical.

> Using multiple keys don't offer added security or secrecy.

Depends on how careful you are or want to be, with your private key. My house key isn't the same as my car key isn't the same as my bike key.

> This is nothing like data harvesting

Alright fair, bad example. What I was grumbling about was more the lack of any clear communication that you've been auto-opted-in to a feature on protonmail, with no user interface signal indicating so, leading to confusion for a couple months like in TFA. I definitely wasn't casting shade on the opengpg keyserver, nor protonmail. It's the "hey! I didn't check a box for this, and it's not mentioned anywhere in the protonmail docs" hidden functionality which could do with some clarification.

I'm a forgetful creature. If I intentionally put my key on a keyserver, because I'm playing around and learning about PGP, will I make the connection between it and protonmail a few months down the line if I move my email account to them? Unlikely.

It's a nice automated feature. Protonmail-to-protonmail e2e encryption makes a lot of sense. I just think protonmail-to-non-protonmail e2e needs a tooltip in the UI, and the option to opt out, potentially with the ability to opt out for specific email addresses. I wouldn't at all assume it would be on by default even IF I've been actively using PGP in my email clients, because it's something you usually have to manually set up yourself, very explicitly. That, and 99.9% of emails are plaintext.

Anyhoo, one thing I forgot which kind of negates the "what if I have multiple encryption keys tied to my email" is the fact that the opengpg keyserver does tie 1 email address to 1 key so you can't publish multiple encryption keys, fair enough. Git-crypt and file encryption, I set my associated email address to use +tags eg [email protected], so as far as protonmail etc are concerned there's only one key per logical email address.

Apart from a few exceptions (like ansible for example, which supports native encryption), we moved away from encrypted secrets in git repos and use external things, depending on the platform (like parameter store / secrets manager for AWS or keyvault for Azure - both of these do track changes, btw), so I haven't looked for quite a while. Back in ye olden days we used https://github.com/AGWA/git-crypt which worked quite nicely, but the key management is cumbersome and it's based on GPG, which in itself is a bit of a light redish flag these days.

How about encryption?

https://github.com/AGWA/git-crypt has been solid for me

You might want to check out git-crypt. It allows you to encrypt and decrypt files in a git repo without needing an external account, and supports .env files. That said, trying your hand at making one as a personal project could be a fun and rewarding experience!

I hesitate to append this but one option I have seen thrown around and also debated is git-crypt [1] There are many caveats to doing this as any integrations that would need to read the file contents would also need to be able to decrypt the files so this may not be entirely useful and may add many levels of complexity and fragility.

[1] - https://github.com/AGWA/git-crypt

The most interesting approach I've seen for this is https://github.com/AGWA/git-crypt

Here is the Makefile.

I use git-crypt to encrypt files in git repositories quite a lot and I find that it doesn't work on RHEL-based distros because of some missing or out-of-date library. I need to build a statically linked binary.

Store the Secrets in a repo using gitcrypt or another encryption tool.

Consider using git-crypt for transparent encryption instead.

The code base seems like a good reference as a small Python project.

My fav option in this class of apps: https://lnav.org/ It lets you use journalctl with pipes as requested here: https://github.com/Textualize/toolong/issues/4

For local development, I cannot recommend lnav[1] enough. Discovering this tool was a game changer in my day to day life. Adding comments, filtering in/out, prettify and analyse distribution is hard to live without now.

I don't think a browser tool would fit in my workflow. I need to pipe the output to the tool.

[1] https://lnav.org/

It looks like they run an SSH server inside a Docker container defined by this Dockerfile [1]. This uses the ForceCommand directive in the sshd_config file to ensure that a specific command is run when a user connects (rather than the user connecting directly to a shell).

Depending on whether the user connects as the `playground` or `tutorial1` user they interact with a bash script that is either [2] or [3].

[1]: https://github.com/tstack/lnav/blob/master/demo/Dockerfile

[2]: https://github.com/tstack/lnav/blob/master/docs/tutorials/pl...

[3]: https://github.com/tstack/lnav/blob/master/docs/tutorials/tu...

This is really pretty - I do really wish for a good rust replacement for lnav[1] someday.

1: https://lnav.org/

> I also don't see something else I might want: a way to have a different "view" for certain log messages; maybe to switch between filtering/viewing particular ones, maybe to just have line-format be conditional based on the detected format.

Have a look at the following comment on an issue that might be similar to what you're thinking of:

https://github.com/tstack/lnav/issues/1065#issuecomment-1602...

> I guess I can sort of do this based on `module-field`? but I might want it lighter-weight/finer-grained than that.

Unfortunately, the "module-field" does not work for JSON logs at the moment. It's something I should really fix.

Ultimately, lnav has existed for almost two decades now and I use it every day. So, it's always seeing improvements. If you're having a problem with it, file an issue on github. I don't always get around quickly to fixing other folks feature requests / issues, but it tends to happen eventually.

Thanks.