Sharing files between Ubuntu 6.06 and Windows XP Pro - best disk format to use

[Derek Broughton]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> 
>>> Derek Broughton wrote:
>>>> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In summary, it's mostly because it's not self-journaling and thus
>>>>> (relatively) easy to corrupt and fragment.  However, I'll repeat that
>>>>> I haven't had any real *problems*
>>>> True.  Its drawbacks are also its advantages.  It's simple.  I wouldn't
>>>> want to do real work on it, and since my only use for Windows is
>>>> Quicken , the only data I want in Windows I definitely _don't_ want on
>>>> FAT, but I have used FAT partitions for moving data around.
>>> I still think that might be a bit over-cautious.  If you're not running
>>> a server, and keep regular backups, there's really nothing worth
>>> worrying about.
>> 
>> For my bookkeeping?  I don't think so.  I don't want those files on an
>> unsecured filesystem.  My whole windows partition is FAT32, so that I can
>> easily play with it from the Linux system, but I don't keep any sensitive
>> data there - either sensitive in the sense that I don't want anyone else
>> seeing it, or just in the sense that I can't stand to lose it.
> 
> Relying on the filesystem for encryption is a bad idea, IMHO.  I would
> use a dedicated solution for that.
> 
What's that got to do with what I said?  If I keep the data on the linux
filesystem, then I have numerous options for security and encryption.  If I
keep it on a FAT filesystem, I don't.
-- 
derek