On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Todd A. Jacobs <codegnome.consulting+deb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Dan <ganc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would like to encrypt some folders in the home directory of the >> users in a server. I have seen that there are 2 choices ecryptfs and >> encfs. They seem to be very similar. Which one do you think that it is >> better? > > One isn't better than the other; they serve different use cases. > Ecryptfs is a stacked filesystem that runs in the kernel, while encfs > is a FUSE-based filesystem that runs in userspace. > > IMHO encfs is a better solution for individual users; it's less > complex to implement and doesn't have stack issues (see > http://ecryptfs.sourceforge.net/ecryptfs-faq.html#stack). On the other > hand, ecryptfs is the default for encrypted home directories in Ubuntu > and probably works faster due to running in kernel space. > > Generally, my advice is to use dm-crypt for block devices (like > encrypting an entire /home partition that root plans to mount at > bootup), and encfs for encrypting individual directories other than > $HOME. YMMV.
Why do you say that ecrypt is less complex. From a user "point of view" ecryptfs seems to be easy to implement in a multiuser server. The issues of being a stack filesystem only affect the XFS file system, not the ext3 or ext4. Right? It seems that ecryptfs is more popular than encfs. Is there any reason for that? Dan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimfv4cc4g_99-txca37lpw8fwv5eho7unavm...@mail.gmail.com
