Re: Setting up PC for dual-boot Linux and Windows XP

From: Nico Kadel-Garcia (nkadel_at_verizon.net)
Date: 08/31/03 

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 13:06:36 GMT

Michael C. wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 15:12:53 +1200,
> ~misfit~ <misfit@'SPAMTRAP'orcon.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>> your RAM, inteneded use etc. between 500MB and 1GB for swapfile. I use NTFS
>> for the XP partition and FAT32 for the pagefile as FAT32 is faster but
>> slightly less secure than NTFS. That's not really a problem for a pagefile
>> and, depending on your machine's specs, can make an appreciable difference.
>>
>
> While I'd assume FAT32 is faster, it has NO security, and a pagefile can
> be a significant security risk. I don't recall if it can be exploited
> over the net or not, you may need physical access to the computer, I
> don't recall.

No filesystem is secure (except the encrypted filesystems) if you have
physical access. An appropriate Linux kernel can read *ALL* of them,
including NTFS, from a boot floppy or boot CD.

What FAT32 lacks that NTFS nad ext2 or ext3 have (as the most common
other filesystems for Windows and Linux), is a sense of file multiple
different file owners and permissions when the system is up and running.

> Assuming you aren't running a full time server, run a firewall, and need
> to squeeze every last drop of speed out of the machine, I wouldn't worry
> about it too much, just realize it could be a risk.
>
> I haven't read about this in probably close to 2 years, you could try a
> W2K/XP group for more info.

The big advantage to FAT32 these days is being able to read *and write*
to it from a Linux, UNIX, or even MacOS kernel as well as from Windows.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How safe is a "Limited" XP account?
    ... It depends on the vulnerability the ... > NTFS it is very, very, much more secure than if it is installed on a FAT or ... Not so on NTFS. ... Linux is certainly no OpenBSD ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: How safe is a "Limited" XP account?
    ... It depends on the vulnerability the ... > NTFS it is very, very, much more secure than if it is installed on a FAT or ... Not so on NTFS. ... Linux is certainly no OpenBSD ...
    (comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.security)
  • Re: How safe is a "Limited" XP account?
    ... It depends on the vulnerability the ... > NTFS it is very, very, much more secure than if it is installed on a FAT or ... Not so on NTFS. ... Linux is certainly no OpenBSD ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Is it really true that NTFS is secure?
    ... though getting Snort to alert just on interesting events on a Windows server ... Other things to do to look for the source of the hacking and secure your ... on Prof full time now and I am battling security it seems every hour. ... though I'm not sure this has to do with NTFS. ...
    (microsoft.public.security)
  • Re: Setup up merge replication - problem with my config of MSSQLServer?
    ... to secure the virtual directory ... to share and secure the snapshot folder. ... You can convert a FAT32 filesystem to NTFS easily using the built-in utility ... > copies of the database, new publications, new snapshot. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.ce)
Loading