© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
73416ba
(Get the code!)
Thanks mhalcrow for your elaborate reply. While appreciated, IMHO you don't need to apologize. It's not your fault we as end-users weren't notified of this limitation during installation.
For a lot of us, the situation looks pretty sad. There's eCryptfs which has the file name limitation and there's full disk encryption which is (AFAIK) only available on the alternate installer. And last time I heard, full disk encryption poses problems when Windows is installed on the same disk, leaving eCryptfs as the only option to many of us. So kudos for trying to fix this!
About your proposed solution - as an Ubuntu 16.04.2 user with (currently) 4.10 kernel, does this mean I could use ext4 encryption without too much risks or would I still be in "early adopter" territory?