| 1 |
On 2013-01-18, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Paul Arthur wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 2013-01-17, Maxim Kammerer <mk@×××.su> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> > All in all, secure-delete has its uses. What are people supposed to |
| 6 |
>> > use instead, dd if=/dev/zero of=/media/sdcard/naked_gf_0001.jpg? |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Perhaps 'shred', which is part of coreutils? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> From man shred: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> CAUTION: Note that shred relies on a very important assumption: that |
| 13 |
> the file system overwrites data in place. This is the traditional way |
| 14 |
> to do things, but many modern file system designs do not satisfy this |
| 15 |
> assumption. The following are examples of file systems on which shred |
| 16 |
> is not effective, or is not guaranteed to be effective in all file sys- |
| 17 |
> tem modes: |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> * log-structured or journaled file systems, such as those supplied with |
| 20 |
> AIX and Solaris (and JFS, ReiserFS, XFS, Ext3, etc.) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yes. This is the exact same issue secure-delete has, since it uses |
| 23 |
the same approach. shred is just as useful as srm (in fact it's more |
| 24 |
useful, since it doesn't mandate the full, useless run of 38 passes |
| 25 |
that srm does.) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
The testicle that can be seen, felt, kicked, is not the true testicle. The true |
| 29 |
testicle... why, it's in your heart, as long as you can keep the magic of death |
| 30 |
energy and hatred of life alive in your soul. |
| 31 |
--Random Nerd on RPGnet |
Archives