On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 12:50:27PM -0700, Richard Esplin wrote: > Way too complicated. apt-get, mkdir, and mount are the only commands that it > should require, and even then it doesn't count as trivial. Any thing else > would require studying manpages and other documentation. I really like the > way the 2.6 kernel handles the filesystem once it is set up--just mount and > use the thing; but it requires _way_ too much effort to set up. I think the > infrastructure in the kernel is adequate (even excellent), now it just needs > a good, idiot friendly interface (not necessarily graphical). If it isn't > absolutely simple, it will be difficult to find the time and energy > to set it > up and incorporate it into daily usage. Simplicity is paramount because the > only security I need is against an unsophisticated attacker when I am not > using the computer, i.e. my laptop gets stolen.
Good. I agree that loop-aes and cfs are both insufficiently
transparent. How about the ability to right-click on a file in
konqueror or nautilus, select ``Encrypted'', and then have all
encryption and decryption take place for that one file, transparently
to any end user applications?
Mike
.___________________________________________________________________.
Michael A. Halcrow
Security Software Engineer, IBM Linux Technology Center
GnuPG Fingerprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D 2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D
Fight mandatory .signature truncation! Call
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
