[I am asking from perspective from a user in such cases here. So don’t assume any kind of “authority” from my side. It’s just small feedback. Having that said…]
Please document what “Private Disk Image”. I think the term may be quite misleading. Implicating encryption or even stenography. A small explanation or even just footnote / link might be enough.
[quote=“Patrick, post:1, topic:540”][I am asking from perspective from a user in such cases here. So don’t assume any kind of “authority” from my side. It’s just small feedback. Having that said…]
Please document what “Private Disk Image”. I think the term may be quite misleading. Implicating encryption or even stenography. A small explanation or even just footnote / link might be enough.[/quote]
Will do!
I will put this on my todo and post back here once done.
Added footnote for: Private Disk Image Explanation
In step: Expand Private Disk Image of whonix-images:
The private disk image is simply the user writable private.img space, in comparison to a template's shared root.img. See Qubes documentation: https://qubes-os.org/wiki/ResizeDiskImage https://qubes-os.org/wiki/TemplateImplementation
Let me know if this still needs further clarification.
Thanks!
The word private is loaded. Users interpret loads of things into it. I’d also add “No further promises about privateness, such as encryption are made.” And then perhaps link to some (upstream) docs on how to encrypt Qubes.
Ah… The language was borrowed from Qubes docs, but, I see the general conceptual confusion with the word “private”.
However, where it is being used in our instructions is for a temporary VM that gets deleted and is not either of the actual Whonix VMs.
Getting into encryption concepts during the steps of a throwaway VM that is not related to the actual Whonix VMs would likely confuse people much further.
What if I were to simply remove the one word “private” and just use “disk image”?
Expand Private Disk Image of whonix-images:
would become
Expand Disk Image of whonix-images:
Implemented this and removed the entire loaded term “Private”.
Hopefully this solution suffices.
Yes.