I have managed both a small overburn, and any amount of underburn, now I just keep burning the same image file with different files on it. I have my doubts about the security of this, as any space that is not rewritten between burns will have the same data on it, that would certainly tell someone about the size of the data written, and might provide other avenues of attack. The reason I used ext2 (which I don't think is journalled afaik) was it's ability to support all the filenames and directory depths that I might find on the volume I an writing to DVD. As pointed out compatibility with Windows is out anyway until loop-aes is available there. Also it can handle symbolic links, I'm not sure that they would be OK with iso9660. BTW, does anyone know of a way of making symbolic links to volumes that are offline that when you try to open them run some external program to cause the volume to be mounted? That way I could keep all the directories of backed up stuff available, with just access to the data requiring a volume to be mounted. Regards, Paul Hilton On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 20:59, Peter_22@xxxxxx wrote: > So far I don´t know if all the space should be used and what will > happen if a DVD is over-burned. I wouldn´t use ext2 or 3 on > CD/DVD. What should a journal be good for on a read-only medium? > Furthermore there would be the possibility to access those > encrypted disks also under Windows. For that someone has to > publish a driver for loop-aes under a Windows environment. > Btw. building encrypted containers and storing them on DVD isn´t > a good idea. You need to use udf for all files exceeding 2GB. The > examples from aespipe are definitely the right choice. > > Regards, > Peter - Linux-crypto: cryptography in and on the Linux system Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/
