ali: Well, I don't know much about Windows but I don't see how NTFS is more secure. A quick google seems to indicate that NTFS is the only file system that supports permissions (or in other words has a bit of metadata that indicates permissions); ridicolous if that is true. So, from that perspective it is certainly more secure!

It's other 'security benefit' is that it supports file encryption; I'm not sure of the strength of it and I'd be curious to see how it is implemented - after all, it's not much use if the key is stored in plain text.

Also, according to "Forensic Discovery" decrypted text is still easily found in memory after it has been closed. And it's suprisingly hard to totally get rid of memory contents; especially with swap.

But, NTFS is proboably still the way to go.

----- START OFFTOPIC RANTING -----
From my plan9 view (proboably due to Ken Thompson and Dennis Ritchie's brainwashing) a more elegant solution of encrypted files would be to simply write a 9p server that provides it; it wouldn't fix the problem of information leaks but having swap space encrypted and erasing memory when used by another user should fix it - there doesn't seem to be any easy (and correct) solution, though.
----- END OFFTOPIC RANTING -----