Re: NTFS (was Re: [LUG] new laptop)

[Keith Langmead <penfold@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Kai Hendry wrote:
> The security NTFS provides is a joke. Esp. from the exploits I have seen
> with Windows 2000. FAT32 imo is faster. However, I could not find stats to prove
> it (can you prove the contrary?).

NTFS Security is very good, for proof, take a NTFS HDD from a machine,
stick in another, and try and access it, you'll find you can't do diddly,
since you're not authenticated. The method used in NTFS is very similar to
Linux/Unix, eg using SID's (basically the same as UID's). It's the rest of
NT where the security vulnerabilities are found, and half of the time,
just using a little intelligence when you setup the machine eliminates
those.

However, with regard to speed, I have to agree with you, don't have any of
the references to hand, but I believe FAT32 is faster then NTFS, which
would make sence, since it has none of the overheads found in NTFS caused
by doing the security stuff.

Keith


--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.