On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 09:53:08PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:15:12 -0600, Albert Hopkins wrote:
>
> > I would probably use encfs, forget about the one-lvm-per-user
> > complexity, and just back up the encrypted filesystem just like any
> > other fs.
>
> Alternatively, you could do the same with the in-kernel ecryptfs. These
> two solutions work in much the same way, allowing you to mount individual
> directories with their own passwords, so you could have a single /home
> with each user's directory having its own password. You back up the
> encrypted data, so no passwords are needed for this.
ecryptfs-utils apaprently is for ~x86 only. Any idea of when it will
be ready for ~amd64?
One of the things I want is to move this external drive from machine
to machine. It would be a shame if 32 bit and 64 bit didn't talk to
each other!
I do have encfs emrrged on all machines, so I can start there with
experimentation; it does encrypt file names, but I'd rather have a
solid encrypted block than bits and pieces. I suppose that might not
matter a whole lot.
--
... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
