Thanks for the reply...
And, I believe multiple persistence would give another benefit...
If someone were coerced into giving their password, they could give one
and not the other...
This is why it should just ask for a password instead of ask for a user
name first, or presenting a list of users to choose from
By entering a specific password, the user choice would be constrained
with no hint of other user-options (except size of volume?)
perhaps saving more than hardware =)
> Thomas:
>> I tried to find other places specifically about feature requests..
>> never quite got there tho I followed a few hints =(
>> So, here it is, I hope someone here can forward it, or tell me how
>> to, to a more appropriate place.
> tails-ux is fine as you are suggesting some new use scenarios. Maybe
> tails-dev would be more appropriate as it's our general purpose mailing
> list and more people read it.
>
>> I think it would be wonderful if we had the option when signing in to
>> persistent volume to access several different sets of data, several
>> different persistent volumes.
>> Sort of like signing in as a different user in some other OS's
>> BUT ! big difference requested!!
>> DO NOT ask which volume, just ask for a password, as it is now, but have
>> the option that different passwords would take you to different
>> persistent volumes =)
>> This way, no one could know easily/up-front how many volumes there
>> are, or anything identifying about them.
>> Also, if TAILS automatically asked for a password at the beginning,
>> /even when there is NO persistent volume/, it would be a fine added
>> confusion to any hacker looking for your records...
>>
>> any thoughts? possibility of this? I think it would not be super
>> hard to do, as I suspect a lot of the basic code to do this is already
>> there... just ad a few new pointers ?
>> thanks for your time/attention =)
> This looks like #5929 [1] ("Create encrypted persistent volume by
> default for plausible deniability"), except that you are proposing
> several volumes per USB stick. This would be something different but
> once we get #5929, the main security property that you are imagining
> would work already. Having multiple persistent storage on a single USB
> stick would only save you hardware.
>
> [1]: https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/5929
