 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Oh, are you doing a quick format, or a full format? A "full format"
> actually does read the entire drive. Ext apparently won't do a "full
> format". You have to do a quick format, then scan the disk for errors.
Full format.
Does it just scan the disk, or does it actually write data to it? I was
under the impression it wipes the cluster descriptors, yet doesn't
actually erase every single block on the disk...
>> For me, ext2 takes about 15 seconds or so - very much faster.
>> Comparable to an NTFS "quick format".
>
> Try doing a "quick format" with NTFS. The difference between a 15-second
> ext format and a 20-minute NTFS format gives me the impression that your
> NTFS format is actually looking for flawed sectors to map out.
An NTFS quick format takes about 15-20 seconds, same as ext2.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> Have you ever *tried* to make a hot fire?
>>
>> Hot enough to melt aluminium or glass - no problem.
>
> Heh. I had enough trouble trying to burn through a tree stump!
>
> Now if I had *thermite*... >:-D
>
You don't need thermite, just gasoline. Soak the stump with it for a
few hours (or even a day or two) first :) :) :)
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Unless the drive had a command
> built in that wiped the entire track in one rotation or something,
> rather than actually having to transfer the data from memory to the
> drive for the whole thing.
>
Actually, that would be a pretty cool feature for a hard drive: an
external button that, when pressed, caused the drive to overwrite itself
with random data.
(Or maybe instead of a button, a keyhole, so it would be harder to do
accidentally).
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> First rule in data security: Never assume any data is unrecoverable.
>>
>> Second rule in data security: Never assume nobody is watching.
>
> Third rule in data security: There's no point in overkill. :-P
>
I don't think you'd enjoy working in a bank. They actively encourage
paranoia.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Now if I had *thermite*... >:-D
>>
>
> You don't need thermite, just gasoline. Soak the stump with it for a
> few hours (or even a day or two) first :) :) :)
I was talking about melting a harddrive. :-P
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Third rule in data security: There's no point in overkill. :-P
>>
>
> I don't think you'd enjoy working in a bank. They actively encourage
> paranoia.
Well, a bank has data that is *worth* spending a fortune attacking.
Having serious security for a system that actually warrants it is not
overkill, by definition. :-P
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>
>> Oh, are you doing a quick format, or a full format? A "full format"
>> actually does read the entire drive. Ext apparently won't do a "full
>> format". You have to do a quick format, then scan the disk for errors.
>
> Full format.
>
> Does it just scan the disk, or does it actually write data to it?
For a hard drive, it's read-only on any area not touched by a quick
format. So, yes, what you said.
> An NTFS quick format takes about 15-20 seconds, same as ext2.
Huh. Mine's about 5 times as fast. Of course, how often do you format a
partition? Five seconds or 30 seconds, in the grand scheme, isn't
significant. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> Actually, that would be a pretty cool feature for a hard drive: an
> external button that, when pressed, caused the drive to overwrite itself
> with random data.
I've seen drive enclosures with a USB key that has an encryption key on
it, so everything on the whole drive is automatically encrypted with the
key. I was thinking of getting one until someone actually analyzed it
and figured out it was doing the equivalent of ROT-13 with the drive.
Advertised as using AES for encryption, it just used AES for generating
the key, said key then being xored identically with every sector read or
written on the disk. Feh.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:28:51 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Right. But if I've erased every individual block on the drive (rather
> than just, say, reinstalling Windows on it) then it won't find anything.
I must've been more tired than I thought I was (haven't been sleeping
well) - somehow I *completely* missed this. Of course if that was easily
possible, I wouldn't be contemplating how to replace data on a drive
that's developed some bad sectors. Out-of-band recovery is the only way
I'd be able to do that, and that is damned expensive, yes.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 22:24:08 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> First rule in data security: Never assume any data is unrecoverable.
>>
>> Second rule in data security: Never assume nobody is watching.
>
> Third rule in data security: There's no point in overkill. :-P
That only works if you know what constitutes overkill. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
