Sparse Image or Sparse Bundle Image

http://macosx.com/article/live-filevaultsparse-bundle-backups-in-leopard.html

Basically, Sparse Bundle Images (used by FileVault in 10.5) are Sparse Disk Images which are broken up into 8MB "bands," presumably so that Time Machine only has to backup certain portions of the image instead of the entire thing.

Does anyone have an answer to this? I deal with a lot of sensitive information during my software consulting, and I've always used 128 bit encrypted sparse images to perform my work on. Now I notice that I have 256 bit and sparse bundle disk images. Are the sparse bundles as secure as disk images, and will I still need to manually run the compact command from hdiutil to "shrink" the drive when I delete files off of it?

Thanks,
Todd

The type of the image and the level of security have nothing to do with each other. A 128 bit encrypted sparse image is just as secure as a 128 bit encrypted CD/DVD master. Obviously using 256 bit encryption is more secure.

I don't know what is the difference and I'd like to know it too 🙂

So for non-TimeMachine backups - SuperDuper for instance - is there any benefit of using Sparse Bundle Disk Image vs. Sparse Disk Image?

Message was edited by: Rudy