Re: Why start the first partition at 2 MIB, why not at any multiple of 4096 bytes ...
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> writes:
> On Wed 09 Sep 2020 at 08:53:20 (-0600), Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> rhkramer@gmail.com writes:
>> > On Tuesday, September 08, 2020 04:39:05 PM David Christensen wrote:
>> >> Neither the string "2 MiB" nor the string "2 M" appear on page you have
>> >> cited.
>> >
>> > That is correct, that's is what I have not found on that page.
>> >
>> >> Please provide a URL that advocates "start the first partition at 2 MIB"
>> >
>> > Maybe I misinterpreted what David Wright said in an email
>> > responding to one of
>> > my questions back in June.
>> >
>> > <quote>
>> > Subject: Re: Advice on encrypted filesystem
>> > Date: Friday, June 26, 2020, 09:25:49 AM
>> > From: David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
>> > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>> >
>> > ---< snip >---
>> >
>> > If encrypting an entire disk, scramble the disk first, then partition.
>> > If only encrypting a partition, partition the disk first.
>> > *Alignments should be at least 2M (4096 x 512B sectors).*
>> > Scramble any sensitive pre-existing contents:
>> > </quote>
>> >
>> > I took that to mean that the first partition should start at 2 MiB.
>>
>> That doesn't follow -- 0 is 2 MiB-aligned (it's also aligned on whatever
>> other size boundary you care to name, of course).
>
> Care to explain how you align the first partition with the start of the disk?
Ah, of course.
Reply to: