Paul Graydon wrote: > On 08/24/2010 02:25 PM, Doug Hughes wrote: > >> You're right. I confused secure erasing (which no longer requires many >> passes, even though it remains part of the common cargo-cult lore), with >> recovery under normal circumstances. It is plausible, that normal >> non-erased data could be recovered with a controller change on different >> commonly used drive models of similar types. >> >> > > That one whizzed past my head with an audible whooshing sound. Since > when does secure erasing no longer require multiple passes? > _______________________________________________ > The commoditization of PRML in 1996 or so. See the epilogue of the Guttman paper: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html
"For any modern PRML/EPRML drive, a few passes of random scrubbing is the best you can do. As the paper says, "A good scrubbing with random data will do about as well as can be expected". This was true in 1996, and is still true now." Simson Garfinkel went on at his last LISA IT to indicate that one or two is probably sufficient for all but the most resource-rich opponents, with 3 being for the ultra paranoid. _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
