[cctalk] Re: Floppy recovery
On 6/21/23 01:50, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jun 2023, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> the cookie to a clean jacket after cleaning. If it's oxide shedding, I >> use a couple of drops of cyclomethicone on each side. > > Is it essentially the same as silicone oil? Because cyclomethicone is > just a category for three different cyclic siloxanes (D4, D5 and D6), > namely cyclotetrasiloxane, cyclopentasiloxane and cyclohexasiloxane. > D4 and D5 have been put on the ECHA list of forbidden substances in 2018. > So, what exactly do you use? ;-) This stuff: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane The ECHA documents are linked. As far as I can determine, use has been restricted, not forbidden in the ECHA. The cosmetics industry would likely go bankrupt without it. I'm not suggesting that anyone drink it or bathe in it (although it is used in many shampoos), but then, neither am I suggesting people bathe in petrol either, although it's useful and carcinogenic. Manufacturing data shows that at least a hundred million tons of the stuff is manufactured yearly. I use it on disks and tapes because it's a lubricant that's both chemically inert and volatile; that is, after using, it evaporates and leaves the medium unaffected. Make your own decisions. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023, Chuck Guzis wrote: the cookie to a clean jacket after cleaning. If it's oxide shedding, I use a couple of drops of cyclomethicone on each side. Is it essentially the same as silicone oil? Because cyclomethicone is just a category for three different cyclic siloxanes (D4, D5 and D6), namely cyclotetrasiloxane, cyclopentasiloxane and cyclohexasiloxane. D4 and D5 have been put on the ECHA list of forbidden substances in 2018. So, what exactly do you use? ;-) Christian
[cctalk] Re: Floppy recovery
On 6/20/23 13:59, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 1:53 PM Warner Losh via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> OK. I have just read in a bunch of Rainbow disks. Most of them read fine on >> the first, second or third try. Some have a sector or three amiss (I've not >> yet checked to see if those sectors are mapped to the filesystem or not). >> Some appear to be 'unformatted' though sometimes they read with errors. >> These disks have what appears to be some kind of grime/mold/??? on their >> surface. >> >> Is there a good way to read these diskettes? To clean the grime off and >> allow the floppy to spin (they all are super loud)... >> >> At the rate things are going, there will be 5-10 of these... Depends on what's making the noise. If it's dirt and heavy, I remove the cookie to a clean jacket after cleaning. If it's oxide shedding, I use a couple of drops of cyclomethicone on each side. Works every time. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 1:53 PM Warner Losh via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > OK. I have just read in a bunch of Rainbow disks. Most of them read fine on > the first, second or third try. Some have a sector or three amiss (I've not > yet checked to see if those sectors are mapped to the filesystem or not). > Some appear to be 'unformatted' though sometimes they read with errors. > These disks have what appears to be some kind of grime/mold/??? on their > surface. > > Is there a good way to read these diskettes? To clean the grime off and > allow the floppy to spin (they all are super loud)... > > At the rate things are going, there will be 5-10 of these... > > Warner > This rig can do the job ==> https://www.ebay.com/itm/303620862566 Sellam
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Charles Anthony wrote: Putting it a crate with a few hundred other drives... Label the one next to yours: CONFIDENTIAL : TOP SECRET or label the one next to yours: TAX RECEIPTS, and label your drive: REAL TAX RECEIPTS If you were to label your enemy's drive ISIS, CHILD PORN would that consume enough resources that they don't bother with yours?
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
> They are also useful if you are also doing your own high-grade gold refining > pass, for preparation of material. The two recycling operators I know are > probably doing this process as well. There are some groups now using hammer mills and shaker tables in order to try and cut down the amount of nasty chemicals involved. The hammer mills can pulverize the electronics down to something like very fine sand. -- Will
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On 01/07/2016 08:17 PM, jwsmobile wrote: They are also useful if you are also doing your own high-grade gold refining pass, for preparation of material. The two recycling operators I know are probably doing this process as well. Most gold recover folks are not trusted. There are several Youtube clips of these things in operation, including one that's being fed vintage Macs. --Chuck
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On 1/7/2016 6:20 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, drlegendre . wrote: What's wrong with the "disassemble and rend with heavy hammer" approach? Doesn't that render the platters un-readable, if done with sufficient ardor? Bending the platters will keep them from turning and being usable in the drive, but does NOT prevent various other imaging methods. Breaking a platter in half doesn't prevent those techniques. There are machines sold to machine document destruction folks that will shred the entire drive into pieces the size of large grains of sand. They are deployable on trucks with on site document destruction services, and I know of two friends here in Orange Country who have bought them. They are also useful if you are also doing your own high-grade gold refining pass, for preparation of material. The two recycling operators I know are probably doing this process as well. Most gold recover folks are not trusted. thanks jim
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: > On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, drlegendre . wrote: > >> What's wrong with the "disassemble and rend with heavy hammer" approach? >> Doesn't that render the platters un-readable, if done with sufficient >> ardor? >> > > Bending the platters will keep them from turning and being usable in the > drive, but does NOT prevent various other imaging methods. > > Breaking a platter in half doesn't prevent those techniques. > > Shattering a glass platter into dozens of pieces doesn't prevent those > techniques. > > breaking it into tiny bits may or may not depending on how much effort > somebody is willing to put into identifying where each piece came from in > the platter. > > High heat should work. > > Sanding all of the rust off of the platter should work. > > Mailing the drive to a government office, with a note saying, "please help > me recover the pictures of my grandmother's birthday party", and having it > lost in their mailroom might work. > > > Putting it a crate with a few hundred other drives... -- Charles
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, drlegendre . wrote: What's wrong with the "disassemble and rend with heavy hammer" approach? Doesn't that render the platters un-readable, if done with sufficient ardor? Bending the platters will keep them from turning and being usable in the drive, but does NOT prevent various other imaging methods. Breaking a platter in half doesn't prevent those techniques. Shattering a glass platter into dozens of pieces doesn't prevent those techniques. breaking it into tiny bits may or may not depending on how much effort somebody is willing to put into identifying where each piece came from in the platter. High heat should work. Sanding all of the rust off of the platter should work. Mailing the drive to a government office, with a note saying, "please help me recover the pictures of my grandmother's birthday party", and having it lost in their mailroom might work.
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
On 2016-01-07 9:06 PM, drlegendre . wrote: What's wrong with the "disassemble and rend with heavy hammer" approach? Doesn't that render the platters un-readable, if done with sufficient ardor? Or spin the disk and scrape off the oxide, I have seen disk drive do that all by themselves, but as I said earlier modern disks mostly use glass platters so you do not even have to disassemble them to smash the platters. Paul.
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
What's wrong with the "disassemble and rend with heavy hammer" approach? Doesn't that render the platters un-readable, if done with sufficient ardor? On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Stefan Skoglund (lokal < stefan.skogl...@agj.net> wrote: > tor 2016-01-07 klockan 15:08 -0500 skrev Mouse: > > > Well, if you don't have access to thermite [...] > > > > Actually, red heat is well above the Curie temperature for most media, > > isn't it? You could chuck the platters into the coals of a bonfire, > > let them get up to a nice cherry red. Depending on what the platters > > are made of, this might even melt them, which should effectively > > destroy any organization in the material that once formed a thin film > > on them. If not, it should demagnetize the coating > > Unhealthy. > > I would expect that to generate a fair amount of sulphuric and > hydrochloric acid. > A fair bit of the shit inside the HD also would end up in the nearby > soil. > >
Re: Floppy recovery
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 4:13 PM, Mouse wrote: > >>> I don't trust the vendor's internal security to keep the key from >>> leaking and I don't trust the vendor's HR security to prevent >>> malware authors from making it to the inside, and I *sure* don't >>> trust the vendor to resist a request from law enforcement [...] >> I donâ¿¿t know if itâ¿¿s typical or not, but every company that >> Iâ¿¿ve worked for that has managed crypto-keys has taken key security >> *very* seriously. > > I find that easy to believe. However: > > (1) "[E]very company [you]'ve worked for" is almost certainly a heavily >biased sample; if you have a tenth the clue you appear to, you >would stay away from the dodgier ones. Probably. ;-) > > (2) Taking key security seriously is a very different thing from being >good at key security. (They probably correlate positively, but not >nearly as strongly as one might wish.) > Agree. In the cases I’m aware of they do both. ;-) TTFN - Guy
Re: Floppy recovery
>> I don't trust the vendor's internal security to keep the key from >> leaking and I don't trust the vendor's HR security to prevent >> malware authors from making it to the inside, and I *sure* don't >> trust the vendor to resist a request from law enforcement [...] > I donâ¿¿t know if itâ¿¿s typical or not, but every company that > Iâ¿¿ve worked for that has managed crypto-keys has taken key security > *very* seriously. I find that easy to believe. However: (1) "[E]very company [you]'ve worked for" is almost certainly a heavily biased sample; if you have a tenth the clue you appear to, you would stay away from the dodgier ones. (2) Taking key security seriously is a very different thing from being good at key security. (They probably correlate positively, but not nearly as strongly as one might wish.) /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Re: Floppy recovery
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 3:52 PM, Mouse wrote: > > >>> Even if your SED doesn't have a back door or badly implemented >>> crypto, you also have to worry about whether someone has managed to >>> install compromised firmware on it. >> The key here is the use of signed firmware, which I believe is the normal pr$ > > That's hardly a fix; all it does is somewhat reduce the pool of people > who can create the compromised firmware. I don't trust the vendor's > internal security to keep the key from leaking and I don't trust the > vendor's HR security to prevent malware authors from making it to the > inside, and I *sure* don't trust the vendor to resist a request from > law enforcement for an easy-to-access backdoor (which will, of course, > promptly get abused, either by others or for other purposes). > I don’t know if it’s typical or not, but every company that I’ve worked for that has managed crypto-keys has taken key security *very* seriously. For example, the key generating system (usually something custom) is kept in an “air gapped” vault (and I *do* mean vault). The vault can only be opened when two authorized individuals are present (ie neither one can get into the vault without the other). Everything is tracked and audited on a regular basis. One big semi-conductor company does it this way (I have personal knowledge). I also helped set up this type of crypo-key management for one of the startups I worked for once upon a time (even to the point where they crypto-key hardware would “self destruct” if tampered with…sorry no sparks, smoke or other visual aids…it just erased itself). TTFN - Guy
Re: Floppy recovery
>>> If you want data security and don't like destroying your hardware,
>>> SED ("sel$
>> You're assuming that the SED doesn't store an extra copy of the
>> decryption key in NVM or on the medium.
That was my initial reaction too!
>> Also, reverse-engineering has shown that at least some SEDs have
>> very bad crypto implementations.
I was not aware of that, but (and this is a depressing commentary on
_something_) it does not surprise me in the least.
>> Even if your SED doesn't have a back door or badly implemented
>> crypto, you also have to worry about whether someone has managed to
>> install compromised firmware on it.
> The key here is the use of signed firmware, which I believe is the normal pr$
That's hardly a fix; all it does is somewhat reduce the pool of people
who can create the compromised firmware. I don't trust the vendor's
internal security to keep the key from leaking and I don't trust the
vendor's HR security to prevent malware authors from making it to the
inside, and I *sure* don't trust the vendor to resist a request from
law enforcement for an easy-to-access backdoor (which will, of course,
promptly get abused, either by others or for other purposes).
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Re: Secure disk destruction [was Re: Floppy recovery]
tor 2016-01-07 klockan 15:08 -0500 skrev Mouse: > > Well, if you don't have access to thermite [...] > > Actually, red heat is well above the Curie temperature for most media, > isn't it? You could chuck the platters into the coals of a bonfire, > let them get up to a nice cherry red. Depending on what the platters > are made of, this might even melt them, which should effectively > destroy any organization in the material that once formed a thin film > on them. If not, it should demagnetize the coating Unhealthy. I would expect that to generate a fair amount of sulphuric and hydrochloric acid. A fair bit of the shit inside the HD also would end up in the nearby soil.
Re: Floppy recovery
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 3:33 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>> If you want data security and don't like destroying your hardware, SED
>> ("self-encrypting drives") are a solution. Those encrypt all data, and
>> "erase" by discarding and replacing the data encryption key. So all your
>> sectors instantly turn to random noise. SSD versions of those are starting
>> to appear, which addresses the invisible old copies problem that regular
>> SSDs have. The great thing of an SED is not just the security of its erase
>> function, but in particular the speed: it takes only seconds to destroy all
>> the data on the drive.
>
> You're assuming that the SED doesn't store an extra copy of the
> decryption key in NVM or on the medium. IMO, that's a very naive
> assumption. Also, reverse-engineering has shown that at least some
> SEDs have very bad crypto implementations.
True. I know of at least one first generation SED that uses ECB mode. Anyone
who has looked at IEEE 802.11 knows that cryptographic competence is not
common, and that some of the people designing cryptosystems are not only
unqualified to do so, but sufficiently ignorant that the aren't even aware that
they aren't qualified.
With SEDs as with any other security tool, one has to be sceptical and ask very
pointed questions. For example, with the SSD kind, I probed deeply into how
the key is replaced in a "crypto erase" operation, down to the level of the
flash memory primitives involved. The particular implementation I looked at
had the correct answers.
> Even if your SED doesn't have a back door or badly implemented crypto,
> you also have to worry about whether someone has managed to install
> compromised firmware on it. People once thought that hacked drive
> firmware was too difficult or expensive to develop for anyone other
> than three-letter agencies, but that's been proven false.
The key here is the use of signed firmware, which I believe is the normal
practice. With that, it's not just a matter of reverse engineering, the
attacker would also have to steal the firmware signing key.
> I'm OK with an SED being a component of the data security solution,
> but I'm not willing to count on it exclusively. I'll still run
> software disk encryption. Preferably open-source software disk
> encryption, so that the source code can be audited, though that's not
> a guarantee either.
Agreed. I've been a TrueCrypt user ever since DriveCrypt went off track.
> One might expect that simple security measures would be enough as long
> as the threat model you're concerned with isn't three-letter agencies.
> Unfortunately any back doors or badly implemented crypto, whether
> installed by TLAs or just through incompetence, are likely to be
> exploited by many miscreants, not just TLAs.
>
> If your threat model IS three-letter agencies, you're basically doomed
> from the outset.
Maybe so. But you can definitely make things much harder, which is worth doing.
paul
Re: Floppy recovery
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
> If you want data security and don't like destroying your hardware, SED
> ("self-encrypting drives") are a solution. Those encrypt all data, and
> "erase" by discarding and replacing the data encryption key. So all your
> sectors instantly turn to random noise. SSD versions of those are starting
> to appear, which addresses the invisible old copies problem that regular SSDs
> have. The great thing of an SED is not just the security of its erase
> function, but in particular the speed: it takes only seconds to destroy all
> the data on the drive.
You're assuming that the SED doesn't store an extra copy of the
decryption key in NVM or on the medium. IMO, that's a very naive
assumption. Also, reverse-engineering has shown that at least some
SEDs have very bad crypto implementations.
Even if your SED doesn't have a back door or badly implemented crypto,
you also have to worry about whether someone has managed to install
compromised firmware on it. People once thought that hacked drive
firmware was too difficult or expensive to develop for anyone other
than three-letter agencies, but that's been proven false.
I'm OK with an SED being a component of the data security solution,
but I'm not willing to count on it exclusively. I'll still run
software disk encryption. Preferably open-source software disk
encryption, so that the source code can be audited, though that's not
a guarantee either.
One might expect that simple security measures would be enough as long
as the threat model you're concerned with isn't three-letter agencies.
Unfortunately any back doors or badly implemented crypto, whether
installed by TLAs or just through incompetence, are likely to be
exploited by many miscreants, not just TLAs.
If your threat model IS three-letter agencies, you're basically doomed
from the outset.
Re: Floppy recovery
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 1:13 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
>
> On 01/07/2016 09:36 AM, Fred Cisin wrote:
>
>> I've heard that there are "standards" for a number of overwrites, and
>> what patterns to use, . . .
>
> The paper that got the most notice was from Peter Gutmann from the early 90s.
>
> https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html
Oh yes, one of my favorite topics. I get a lot of questions where people refer
to "the DoD wiping standard". Unfortunately, there isn't one. There are some
very old documents that give suggestions, but those seem to have expired long
ago. Gutmann's document is similarly old. Any decade-old rule suffers from
the fact that drive technology has changed drastically, and considerations that
were valid then are no longer valid. Gutmann did great work at the time, and
his contribution deserves to be honored, but it has very much been superseded
by technology change. Tracks are so much smaller and margins so tiny that
multiple erasures don't add much if anything.
On the other hand, block replacement, and especially the write remapping done
by SSDs, can leave stuff in places you can't even see until you take the device
apart. In fact, hard drives are not much of an issue, but SSDs should make you
worry.
Incineration should work, but use enough heat. Shredding is questionable,
unless the particles are very small. I think high end shredders are required
to produce particles less than 1/32 inch in size.
Much more recent work on erase was done by Gordon Hughes at UCSD. See
http://cmrr.ucsd.edu/people/Hughes/secure-erase.html for more.
If you want data security and don't like destroying your hardware, SED
("self-encrypting drives") are a solution. Those encrypt all data, and "erase"
by discarding and replacing the data encryption key. So all your sectors
instantly turn to random noise. SSD versions of those are starting to appear,
which addresses the invisible old copies problem that regular SSDs have. The
great thing of an SED is not just the security of its erase function, but in
particular the speed: it takes only seconds to destroy all the data on the
drive.
paul
Re: Floppy recovery
- Original Message - From: "Fred Cisin" To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 1:58 PM Subject: Re: Floppy recovery >>> I've heard that there are "standards" for a number of overwrites, and >>> what patterns to use, . . . > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> The paper that got the most notice was from Peter Gutmann from the early 90s. >> https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html > > Thank you! > > That answers most of our ignorant questions. > > > I wonder what the cost is to do those techniques. > Well, if you don't have access to thermite or even a large sledgehammer then this recommendation of his might be a cost-effective solution: http://www.diskstroyer.com/Home.html Even if you do have that sledgehammer this might be useful as a preprocessing step before final treatment with the aforementioned hammer. I'm fortunate in already having some of the tools in this kit and some experience in their use and I can highly recommend this technique, not only for data destruction but also for relaxation and a source of various unique parts. I wonder how many of those clocks made from HD platters contain sensitive information; definitely something else to worry about... ;-)
Re: Floppy recovery
I've heard that there are "standards" for a number of overwrites, and what patterns to use, . . . On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote: The paper that got the most notice was from Peter Gutmann from the early 90s. https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html Thank you! That answers most of our ignorant questions. I wonder what the cost is to do those techniques.
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/07/2016 09:36 AM, Fred Cisin wrote: I've heard that there are "standards" for a number of overwrites, and what patterns to use, . . . The paper that got the most notice was from Peter Gutmann from the early 90s. https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html --Chuck
Re: Floppy recovery
1) if the alignment of the head of the original recording and of the overwrite head are not a perfect match, then there can be some residual data somewhat off axis. On Thu, 7 Jan 2016, Christian Corti wrote: At a first thought I don't see how there can be residual data because there is the tunnel erase head after the R/W head. The drives must be very misaligned (i.e. more than the width of one erase half) to still have residual data. Yes, that makes sense. But, the erase head probably doesn't scramble the weak residual flux transitions as much as overwriting does. 2) if the data was overwritten once, with a known pattern, then somebody with sufficient resources and motivation can attempt to analyze the noise, and determine "what, overwritten by a 0 could produce the noise that we have here." Accordingly, there are guvmint standards of MULTIPLE patterns to That is why you don't take /dev/zero but /dev/[u]random for overwriting data. Even then, since the s'posedly random data that was used for overwrite is still readable, leading to, "OK, here's what's currently on it, what prior recording would generate THIS background noise?", thus, a scond overwrite of a different pattern would render it past any "reasonable" efforts. I've heard that there are "standards" for a number of overwrites, and what patterns to use, . . . But, as I mentioned before, the most thorough protection of all, is to be too boring for it to be worth any effort at all. 'Course extremely violent total destruction of the drive has its own emotional benefit! I suspect that most of the stuff that impresses the hell out of outsiders to the field is really nothing more than patching DIRectories to "UNERASE" files that haven't even been overwritten.
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Fred Cisin wrote: 1) if the alignment of the head of the original recording and of the overwrite head are not a perfect match, then there can be some residual data somewhat off axis. At a first thought I don't see how there can be residual data because there is the tunnel erase head after the R/W head. The drives must be very misaligned (i.e. more than the width of one erase half) to still have residual data. 2) if the data was overwritten once, with a known pattern, then somebody with sufficient resources and motivation can attempt to analyze the noise, and determine "what, overwritten by a 0 could produce the noise that we have here." Accordingly, there are guvmint standards of MULTIPLE patterns to That is why you don't take /dev/zero but /dev/[u]random for overwriting data. Christian
Re: Floppy recovery
On January 5, 2016 3:30:11 PM CST, Ethan Dicks wrote: >On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >>> Can you enlighten us as to what sort of system/disk format it was? >> >> IIRC, it was several, mostly Japanese. I'd have to go back to my >notes from >> some time back. > >The picture of the one remaining whitebox with the two full-height >floppy drives did remind me of some of the early-to-mid-1980s Japanese >CP/M machines that were all but gone by 1985. > >-ethan so, is it believed that that is a picture of an actual machine involved? because that machine looks EXACTLY like a CP/M machine we built here in MN around 1979 at a company called Multi-Tech Systems (the modem people). It was a clone of a design done by another company called R2E which I seem to remember being French. The system initially used Micropolis 77 track, 100 TPI drives and a Micropolis controller design that was also used in Vector Graphic machines. Toward the end of that product's life at Multi-Tech, it had been upgraded to a GCR controller, with the same drives, and that controller had more horsepower than the host machine it plugged into :-). Machine was called MT-500 and was 64K Z80 at 4 MHz with (4) S-100 slots on the single board. Video was 8275 CRT controller and the tubes were usually amber. I still have one of these machines but without the ~40 lb cabinet it was usually built in. Sure looks similar to me. -- Chris Elmquist
Re: Floppy recovery
>> On 01/05/2016 1:15 PM, Ali wrote: >> Anyone know anything about the custom computer and the custom OS? Nor >> implying anything but Chuck do u have any insights? ;) > Didn't Scotty leave his laptop behind when they were saving the whales? "Hello, computer!"
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/05/2016 1:15 PM, Ali wrote: Anyone know anything about the custom computer and the custom OS? Nor implying anything but Chuck do u have any insights? ;) Didn't Scotty leave his laptop behind when they were saving the whales? John ;-#)#
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/05/2016 03:00 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: NSA has done substantial serious research on that and other recovery. 1) if the alignment of the head of the original recording and of the overwrite head are not a perfect match, then there can be some residual data somewhat off axis. 2) if the data was overwritten once, with a known pattern, then somebody with sufficient resources and motivation can attempt to analyze the noise, and determine "what, overwritten by a 0 could produce the noise that we have here." Accordingly, there are guvmint standards of MULTIPLE patterns to overwrite with to render such extreme techniques unusable. However, I will heartily agree that recovery ceases to be PRACTICAL. I recall reading (back in the 90s, that various labs were fooling with this wrt hard disks of the timeand that any success was extremely small potatoes. i.e. maybe a kilobit per hour and not 100% by any means. We have easier ways now, thanks to the Patriot Act. More personal. When folks would ask me how to completely erase a hard disk, I suggested that bashing it to junk using a good sledge hammer or running it through a log chipper then burning the pieces was a good start. On the other hand, simply shredding floppies isn't good enough. There was an old "The New Explorers" program on putting floppies back together and getting data. I know the people who did it--in one of the shots in the background, you can see Anadisk running. I suggest letting floppies soak for a week in a barrel of diesel, then setting fire to them should do the trick. The old maxim of "you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone" applies to data recovery as well. --Chuck
Re: Floppy recovery --> Harlan Ellison
On 1/5/2016 2:03 PM, Jason Scott wrote: I threw it to 50-50 when I weighed in the possibility that he might find an organization willing to pay him something ridiculous to have the archive posthumously. If that doesn't happen, yeah, 90-10. On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Rich Alderson < ri...@livingcomputermuseum.org> wrote: From: Jason Scott Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:53 PM meone who's dealt with Harlan Ellison on multiple fronts. I will tell you the chances he will burn those drawers is 50-50. Though I've never met him, I have friends who have worked for him. We would put it at 90-10. Rich Rich Alderson I thought about him in the last few years as such as what has happened with Heinlein and the like being an example of not having your wishes followed. He was certainly in fine form when he came to UCI so many years ago, and I recall vaguely that he was not going to leave anything of that behind. I'd hope that as remarkable as his works have been that he does reconsider any decision to destroy the material. I probably won't be around long enough to see anything meaningful come out of anyone trying to make sense of things, but he is definitely someone who puts out things that get your thought processes going. And a 2 hour + lecture was good enough I still recall it these many years later. It was really exciting to have read the things that I had before that time. I only wish I'd have know of more of the Star Trek and other stuff that was and had recently happened near the time of the lecture to have brought that up. I do know there were people who had followed him there that he put off discussing things with, and I suspect that was what they wanted to bring up. thanks jim
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, et...@757.org wrote: If a disk has all zeros written to it, as far as I know from what I've read there is no hope of recovering the data. There were rumors that the government could do it based on really fine detection of magnetic levels or something -- but it was rumor. There are bounties out there if anyone can pull it off. I will heartily agree that recovery ceases to be PRACTICAL. NSA has done substantial serious research on that and other recovery. 1) if the alignment of the head of the original recording and of the overwrite head are not a perfect match, then there can be some residual data somewhat off axis. 2) if the data was overwritten once, with a known pattern, then somebody with sufficient resources and motivation can attempt to analyze the noise, and determine "what, overwritten by a 0 could produce the noise that we have here." Accordingly, there are guvmint standards of MULTIPLE patterns to overwrite with to render such extreme techniques unusable. However, I will heartily agree that recovery ceases to be PRACTICAL. I understand data can be recovered when the file entry is removed from an allocation table but data has not been zereod/randomly written over. truly trivial. tl;dr: single pass is fine -- no need to triple pass erase. THAT depends on who is after you. I don't do anything interesting enough to warrant using a simplistic trivial UNERASE utility. (Which is what launched Norton fUtilities) NSA is not interested in what I am doing.
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Rich Alderson wrote: > From: Jason Scott > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:53 PM >> As someone who's dealt with Harlan Ellison on multiple fronts. I will tell >> you the chances he will burn those drawers is 50-50. > > Though I've never met him, I have friends who have worked for him. We would > put it at 90-10. >From what I've heard, that's far more likely. -ethan
Re: Floppy recovery
>et...@757.org wrote: If a disk has all zeros written to it, as far as I know from what I've read there is no hope of recovering the data. There were rumors that the government could do it based on really fine detection of magnetic levels or something -- but it was rumor. There are bounties out there if anyone can pull it off. I understand data can be recovered when the file entry is removed from an allocation table but data has not been zereod/randomly written over. tl;dr: single pass is fine -- no need to triple pass erase. Since this thread has been focused on Floppy media, my assumption is that writing all zeros does not refer to a hard disk drive. Is my assumption incorrect? I have a (exactly!!) one GB file with all zeros (obviously not a floppy) on my hard drive. If I fill the remaining storage with copies of this file, does that eliminate recovery from that portion of the hard drive? And since I have two physical hard drives, copying from a one GB file from one physical drive to the other physical drive usually takes only about one minute, so it would be quite an efficient method to destroy any old data. Jerome Fine
Re: Floppy recovery
I threw it to 50-50 when I weighed in the possibility that he might find an organization willing to pay him something ridiculous to have the archive posthumously. If that doesn't happen, yeah, 90-10. On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Rich Alderson < ri...@livingcomputermuseum.org> wrote: > From: Jason Scott > Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:53 PM > > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 3:27 PM, jwsmobile > wrote: > > >> On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all > of > >> his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer > >> cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that > now. I > >> think at the time he worked manually as well. > > > As someone who's dealt with Harlan Ellison on multiple fronts. I will > tell > > you the chances he will burn those drawers is 50-50. > > Though I've never met him, I have friends who have worked for him. We > would > put it at 90-10. > > Rich > > > Rich Alderson > Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer > Living Computer Museum > 2245 1st Avenue S > Seattle, WA 98134 > > mailto:ri...@livingcomputermuseum.org > > http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/ >
RE: Floppy recovery
From: Jason Scott Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 1:53 PM > On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 3:27 PM, jwsmobile > wrote: >> On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all of >> his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer >> cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that now. I >> think at the time he worked manually as well. > As someone who's dealt with Harlan Ellison on multiple fronts. I will tell > you the chances he will burn those drawers is 50-50. Though I've never met him, I have friends who have worked for him. We would put it at 90-10. Rich Rich Alderson Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer Living Computer Museum 2245 1st Avenue S Seattle, WA 98134 mailto:ri...@livingcomputermuseum.org http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
Re: Floppy recovery
of hundreds of drives (cloud), SSD, Smart Phones, etc. This includes those that have been purposely or accidentally erased and/or physically damaged. If a disk has all zeros written to it, as far as I know from what I've read there is no hope of recovering the data. There were rumors that the government could do it based on really fine detection of magnetic levels or something -- but it was rumor. There are bounties out there if anyone can pull it off. I understand data can be recovered when the file entry is removed from an allocation table but data has not been zereod/randomly written over. tl;dr: single pass is fine -- no need to triple pass erase.
Re: Floppy recovery
As someone who's dealt with Harlan Ellison on multiple fronts. I will tell you the chances he will burn those drawers is 50-50. On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 3:27 PM, jwsmobile wrote: > > I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. > Maybe Chuck can comment. > > But over a year after they spent the 3 months. Hmmm. It will be > interesting to hear what was recovered, though from what has been written > and passed down about Roddenberry, I'm not expecting much. > > On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all of > his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer > cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that now. I > think at the time he worked manually as well. > > https://www.yahoo.com/tech/floppy-disks-star-trek-creator-182855583.html > > Thanks > Jim >
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/05/2016 12:56 PM, Terry Stewart wrote: Yes, I would have thought an old MSDOS machine with a 360k 5.25 inch floppy drive plus Chuck's 22DISK program and the job could have been done in a day? Might be more too it than it seems maybe... I won't comment much other than to say that Mr. Roddenberry was apparently a laptop/portable aficionado, so some of the floppy formats had never crossed my desk before. I did do DS a favor by recovering erased data as well. In addition to the usual fees, we received a nice box of chocolate, which was welcome. I'm too old to care about credit. The Roddenberry people had, years before, purchased 22Disk from us as well, so they might have been able to do the work themselves. --Chuck
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> Can you enlighten us as to what sort of system/disk format it was? > > IIRC, it was several, mostly Japanese. I'd have to go back to my notes from > some time back. The picture of the one remaining whitebox with the two full-height floppy drives did remind me of some of the early-to-mid-1980s Japanese CP/M machines that were all but gone by 1985. -ethan
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Lyle Bickley wrote: > I'm somewhat familiar with the Roddenberry floppies. They were not in a > standard format - so it was not just a matter of reading the floppies, > but developing software to read the specially formatted and encoded > floppies (understanding directories, files, etc.) and converting them > to files in a format their client could use. Since the article in PC world mentioned that most of the floppies were "in CP/M format", and I know there are many possible ways to make flux transitions on spinning rust, I totally get that it can take some time to figure out where the actual bits are on the medium, but once you have the data portion of the sectors on a modern machine, CP/M wasn't all that complicated, and IIRC, files were on sequential blocks once they started (not scattered about such as with most modern filesystems), knowing that you were starting with something based on CP/M, what was so obscure that it took months to untangle that part? -ethan
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/05/2016 01:21 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote: Guess who Drivesavers sent the floppy images to for recovery? (Modesty forbids). But we've had a working relationship with them for a long time. Can you enlighten us as to what sort of system/disk format it was? IIRC, it was several, mostly Japanese. I'd have to go back to my notes from some time back. --Chuck
Re: Floppy recovery
Attempting to read floppies with the wrong kind of drive can also cause damage. Back in the day, people were all aflutter about drive rings and how having them or not having them caused damage when they read the floppy in a 'foreign' setting. There were rumors about head clearance and such also being an issue when newer drives were used to read older floppies, but I never could find someone that was actually affected by it. Warner On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Terry Stewart wrote: > >200 disks, especially if they weren't in great shape, can take some time. > I assume they wanted full data recovery using all possible means, > >plus conversion of all the documents to a modern format. > > With one-of-a-kind stuff, you don't have the luxury of experimenting and > playing around with it. You have to make sure you aren't > >destroying them further while trying to read them- sometimes you only get > one chance and the mylar coating comes right off. After that, it's over. > > Fair point. Thinking further on it, it would be a softly, softly approach. > > Terry (Tez) > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:03 AM, peter wrote: > > > On 2016-01-05 15:56, Terry Stewart wrote: > > > >> I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. > >>> > >> Maybe Chuck can comment. > >> > >> Yes, I would have thought an old MSDOS machine with a 360k 5.25 inch > >> floppy > >> drive plus Chuck's 22DISK program and the job could have been done in a > >> day? Might be more too it than it seems maybe... > >> > >> Terry (Tez) > >> > > > > 200 disks, especially if they weren't in great shape, can take some time. > > I assume they wanted full data recovery using all possible means, plus > > conversion of all the documents to a modern format. > > > > With one-of-a-kind stuff, you don't have the luxury of experimenting and > > playing around with it. You have to make sure you aren't destroying them > > further while trying to read them- sometimes you only get one chance and > > the mylar coating comes right off. After that, it's over. > > > > -- > > -- > > Pete Rittwage > > Disk Preservation Project > > http://diskpreservation.com > > > > >
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:27:31 -0800 jwsmobile wrote: > I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. > Maybe Chuck can comment. > > But over a year after they spent the 3 months. Hmmm. It will be > interesting to hear what was recovered, though from what has been > written and passed down about Roddenberry, I'm not expecting much. > > On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all > of his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer > cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that > now. I think at the time he worked manually as well. > > https://www.yahoo.com/tech/floppy-disks-star-trek-creator-182855583.html I'm very familiar with DriveSavers. They are a professional forensically qualified firm (you can review all their certifications on their website). Many three letter government agencies, law firms and Hollywood studios, etc. use them to forensically retrieve information from FDD, HDD, Arrays of hundreds of drives (cloud), SSD, Smart Phones, etc. This includes those that have been purposely or accidentally erased and/or physically damaged. I have visited their facilities in Novato, California - and they are truly amazing. I've seldom seen such a capable, quality operation. I'm somewhat familiar with the Roddenberry floppies. They were not in a standard format - so it was not just a matter of reading the floppies, but developing software to read the specially formatted and encoded floppies (understanding directories, files, etc.) and converting them to files in a format their client could use. Cheers, Lyle -- 73 AF6WS Bickley Consulting West Inc. http://bickleywest.com "Black holes are where God is dividing by zero"
Re: Floppy recovery
On 2016-01-05 15:56, Terry Stewart wrote: I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. Maybe Chuck can comment. Yes, I would have thought an old MSDOS machine with a 360k 5.25 inch floppy drive plus Chuck's 22DISK program and the job could have been done in a day? Might be more too it than it seems maybe... Terry (Tez) 200 disks, especially if they weren't in great shape, can take some time. I assume they wanted full data recovery using all possible means, plus conversion of all the documents to a modern format. With one-of-a-kind stuff, you don't have the luxury of experimenting and playing around with it. You have to make sure you aren't destroying them further while trying to read them- sometimes you only get one chance and the mylar coating comes right off. After that, it's over. -- -- Pete Rittwage Disk Preservation Project http://diskpreservation.com
Re: Floppy recovery
On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote: Guess who Drivesavers sent the floppy images to for recovery? (Modesty forbids). But we've had a working relationship with them for a long time. Can you enlighten us as to what sort of system/disk format it was?
RE: Floppy recovery
Anyone know anything about the custom computer and the custom OS? Nor implying anything but Chuck do u have any insights? ;) Original message From: jwsmobile Date: 1/5/2016 12:27 PM (GMT-08:00) To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" Subject: Floppy recovery I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. Maybe Chuck can comment. But over a year after they spent the 3 months. Hmmm. It will be interesting to hear what was recovered, though from what has been written and passed down about Roddenberry, I'm not expecting much. On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all of his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that now. I think at the time he worked manually as well. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/floppy-disks-star-trek-creator-182855583.html Thanks Jim
Re: Floppy recovery
>200 disks, especially if they weren't in great shape, can take some time. I assume they wanted full data recovery using all possible means, >plus conversion of all the documents to a modern format. With one-of-a-kind stuff, you don't have the luxury of experimenting and playing around with it. You have to make sure you aren't >destroying them further while trying to read them- sometimes you only get one chance and the mylar coating comes right off. After that, it's over. Fair point. Thinking further on it, it would be a softly, softly approach. Terry (Tez) On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:03 AM, peter wrote: > On 2016-01-05 15:56, Terry Stewart wrote: > >> I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. >>> >> Maybe Chuck can comment. >> >> Yes, I would have thought an old MSDOS machine with a 360k 5.25 inch >> floppy >> drive plus Chuck's 22DISK program and the job could have been done in a >> day? Might be more too it than it seems maybe... >> >> Terry (Tez) >> > > 200 disks, especially if they weren't in great shape, can take some time. > I assume they wanted full data recovery using all possible means, plus > conversion of all the documents to a modern format. > > With one-of-a-kind stuff, you don't have the luxury of experimenting and > playing around with it. You have to make sure you aren't destroying them > further while trying to read them- sometimes you only get one chance and > the mylar coating comes right off. After that, it's over. > > -- > -- > Pete Rittwage > Disk Preservation Project > http://diskpreservation.com > >
Re: Floppy recovery
On 01/05/2016 12:27 PM, jwsmobile wrote: I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. Maybe Chuck can comment. But over a year after they spent the 3 months. Hmmm. It will be interesting to hear what was recovered, though from what has been written and passed down about Roddenberry, I'm not expecting much. On a tangent, from a lecture 35 years ago by Harlan Ellison, I hope all of his papers are preserved and transcribed. He had about 15 4 drawer cabinets of work notes at that time, probably double or triple that now. I think at the time he worked manually as well. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/floppy-disks-star-trek-creator-182855583.html Guess who Drivesavers sent the floppy images to for recovery? (Modesty forbids). But we've had a working relationship with them for a long time. --Chuck
Re: Floppy recovery
>I wonder how it could take them three months to figure something out. Maybe Chuck can comment. Yes, I would have thought an old MSDOS machine with a 360k 5.25 inch floppy drive plus Chuck's 22DISK program and the job could have been done in a day? Might be more too it than it seems maybe... Terry (Tez)
