Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90165 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-08-19 21:20 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-08-24 19:08 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 92 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
/dev/tcp Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2026-08-19 21:20 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 23:53 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-19 23:42 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2026-08-20 00:59 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-20 03:59 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 10:10 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2026-08-20 18:15 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-20 23:30 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-21 01:18 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-08-21 09:52 +0200
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-21 08:12 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-08-21 11:16 +0200
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-21 22:57 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-08-22 06:17 +0200
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 21:50 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2026-08-24 17:42 +0300
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-24 23:53 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 02:27 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2026-08-23 00:56 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-08-23 04:01 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 03:37 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-23 13:50 +0200
Re: /dev/tcp vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2026-08-23 22:28 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 09:35 +0200
Overwriting with random data (was: Re: /dev/tcp) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 11:10 +0100
Re: Overwriting with random data "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 20:34 +0200
Re: Overwriting with random data Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 20:57 +0100
Re: Overwriting with random data "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 22:26 +0200
Re: Overwriting with random data c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 02:39 -0400
Re: Overwriting with random data Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 08:45 +0100
Re: Overwriting with random data "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:36 +0200
Re: Overwriting with random data The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:12 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 00:37 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-24 00:31 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 09:45 +0200
Re: /dev/tcp The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 12:52 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 12:50 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-08-20 13:50 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-20 13:02 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-08-20 18:26 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-21 13:54 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 22:57 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-22 21:47 +0200
The hammer is best (Was: /dev/tcp) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-08-22 23:50 +0000
Re: The hammer is best (Was: /dev/tcp) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 04:28 -0400
Re: The hammer is best Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 10:14 +0100
Re: The hammer is best "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-23 13:55 +0200
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 13:16 +0100
Re: The hammer is best Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-08-23 21:20 +0200
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-24 02:18 -0400
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 11:26 +0100
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 02:06 -0400
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:18 +0100
Re: The hammer is best Joed Oakes <lost@noway.home.invalid> - 2026-08-23 19:42 -0400
Re: The hammer is best Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-23 23:56 +0000
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-24 02:25 -0400
Re: The hammer is best rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-24 01:14 +0000
Re: The hammer is best "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-24 09:50 +0200
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 00:56 -0400
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-24 00:53 -0400
Re: The hammer is best rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-24 06:42 +0000
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-24 23:34 -0400
Re: The hammer is best rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 04:08 +0000
Re: The hammer is best "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:29 +0200
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 11:28 +0100
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 02:07 -0400
Re: The hammer is best rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 06:39 +0000
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:23 +0100
Re: The hammer is best The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:20 +0100
Re: The hammer is best c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 22:16 -0400
Re: /dev/tcp Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-21 13:41 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-21 22:58 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 22:28 -0400
ksh (was: /dev/tcp) Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-24 13:56 +0100
Bash vs. ksh - Does it matter? And the 'vi' mode thing... (Was: ksh (was: /dev/tcp)) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-08-24 14:57 +0000
Re: ksh (was: /dev/tcp) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-24 21:08 +0000
Re: ksh (was: /dev/tcp) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-08-24 21:28 +0000
Re: ksh (was: /dev/tcp) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 01:11 +0000
Re: ksh (was: /dev/tcp) Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-25 13:25 +0100
Re: ksh c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 02:25 -0400
Re: ksh rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 06:52 +0000
Re: ksh The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:27 +0100
Re: ksh Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-08-25 09:56 +0200
Re: ksh "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:24 +0200
Re: ksh The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:27 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2026-08-20 18:22 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-21 13:57 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-08-23 06:37 -0700
Re: /dev/tcp Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 14:49 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 16:13 +0100
Re: /dev/tcp Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-23 22:31 +0000
Re: /dev/tcp Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-24 19:08 +0100
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-21 13:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1169hp9$9sqa$13@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90219 |
On 20/08/2026 18:02, c186282 wrote: > Other odd Linux tricks - how many know you can > read/write to a disk drive that has no file > system ? Of course. Done all the time with floppies Just write to the raw device. After all, at some level some part of Linux has to do that anyway even if it is writing to a file. -- "An intellectual is a person knowledgeable in one field who speaks out only in others...” Tom Wolfe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-21 22:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <36ucnepaq_p9khT3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90281 |
On 8/21/26 08:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 20/08/2026 18:02, c186282 wrote: >> Other odd Linux tricks - how many know you can >> read/write to a disk drive that has no file >> system ? > Of course. Done all the time with floppies > > Just write to the raw device. > > After all, at some level some part of Linux has to do that anyway even > if it is writing to a file. It used to be popular for holding the max amount of binary data - no space wasted with the file system setup. A few years back I leveraged it for a disk-wipe program. Problem was that disks have become SO huge ... had to use M$ 128/256-bit var classes to access the whole thing. E-Disks ... can't REALLY wipe 'em alas. There are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton way - HAMMER :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-22 21:47 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <fvaplmx3co.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #90314 |
On 2026-08-22 04:57, c186282 wrote: > On 8/21/26 08:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 20/08/2026 18:02, c186282 wrote: >>> Other odd Linux tricks - how many know you can >>> read/write to a disk drive that has no file >>> system ? >> Of course. Done all the time with floppies >> >> Just write to the raw device. >> >> After all, at some level some part of Linux has to do that anyway even >> if it is writing to a file. > > It used to be popular for holding the max amount > of binary data - no space wasted with the file > system setup. > > A few years back I leveraged it for a disk-wipe > program. Problem was that disks have become SO > huge ... had to use M$ 128/256-bit var classes to > access the whole thing. > > E-Disks ... can't REALLY wipe 'em alas. There > are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme > gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton > way - HAMMER :-) Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-22 23:50 +0000 |
| Subject | The hammer is best (Was: /dev/tcp) |
| Message-ID | <116dcl1$3hva0$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #90353 |
In article <fvaplmx3co.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: ... >> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >> way - HAMMER :-) > >Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. But a hammer is forever. -- Trump has normalized hate. The media has normalized Trump.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 04:28 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best (Was: /dev/tcp) |
| Message-ID | <j72cnbBzwudjMxf3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90363 |
On 8/22/26 19:50, Kenny McCormack wrote: > In article <fvaplmx3co.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > ... >>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>> way - HAMMER :-) >> >> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. > > Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a gun > to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. Usually they'll write it on a Post-It and stick it to their monitor :-) Also, encryption is only really great if someone physically STEALS yer disk - pretty rare. If yer system is up and the drives unlocked then they can spy and steal from those far more easily. > But a hammer is forever. Yep ! When I retired I had like 25 old mag drives - a VERY heavy box full. First ran a wipe app I'd writ on them. Then ... Took 'em to The Shop, drill press ... put a half-inch hole through the top and platters. More than Good Enough. DID hate wasting all those neo magnets though ... and HAD removed them from many drives. But, it was bail-out time, so Rude & Crude ........ A "cold chisel" and a big hammer works too. Still have a few 'mobiles' of HDD platters :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 10:14 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <wwvmrudkxkf.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> |
| In reply to | #90363 |
gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: > Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > ... >>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>> way - HAMMER :-) >> >> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. > > Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a > gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I won’t have the opportunity to destroy it. The chances that someone would threaten my life or liberty over it are negligible, but if they did, they wouldn’t need to wait for a device to be disposed of, they’d just turn up at my door with a weapon, RIPA notice or other leverage. Physical destruction is not really relevant for most of the lifetime of confidential data, and encryption does actually achieve something useful in realistic use cases. High value data is protected by keys that no human knows. -- https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 13:55 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <gm3rlmxqg4.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #90379 |
On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: >> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >> ... >>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>>> way - HAMMER :-) >>> >>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. >> >> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a >> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. > > My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from > here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I won’t > have the opportunity to destroy it. Exactly. And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done. Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing them first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. > > The chances that someone would threaten my life or liberty over it are > negligible, but if they did, they wouldn’t need to wait for a device to > be disposed of, they’d just turn up at my door with a weapon, RIPA > notice or other leverage. > > Physical destruction is not really relevant for most of the lifetime of > confidential data, and encryption does actually achieve something useful > in realistic use cases. > > High value data is protected by keys that no human knows. > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 13:16 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116eoal$1sako$9@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90389 |
On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: >>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>> ... >>>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>>>> way - HAMMER :-) >>>> >>>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. >>> >>> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a >>> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. >> >> My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from >> here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I won’t >> have the opportunity to destroy it. > > Exactly. > > And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done. It is UNIVERSALLY done in the UK. Insurance will be voided, contracts lost and people will get fired if it is not. The big sources of usable hardware are BIG corporates - banks, insurance companies, travel agencies... they dump a thousand machines a year to recycling companies who sign in blood that the disk will be CRUSHED. > Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing them > first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the > disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. > No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with nothing worth stealing might... -- The higher up the mountainside The greener grows the grass. The higher up the monkey climbs The more he shows his arse. Traditional
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 21:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116fh62$kokl$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #90392 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing them >> first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the >> disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >> >No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with >nothing worth stealing might... Corporations still act on the customs of the 2000 years because using their brains costs money that doesn't land in budgets where the money to destroy disks is already booked. Greetings Marc -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 02:18 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <l9icnfXKBY35fxb3nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90410 |
On 8/23/26 15:20, Marc Haber wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing them >>> first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the >>> disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >>> >> No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with >> nothing worth stealing might... > > Corporations still act on the customs of the 2000 years because using > their brains costs money that doesn't land in budgets where the money > to destroy disks is already booked. Ummmm ??? Anyway, unless yer the CIA, ONE good whack with a ball-peen WILL ruin those HDDs. Quick and cheap. "Bang Bang Hillry's silver hammer cam down upon those phones" :-) SSDs ? Maybe TWO whacks. A "stun gun" applied to the pins will surely do it too. Sparky Sparky, no more chips.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 11:26 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116h683$2o5cd$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90410 |
On 23/08/2026 20:20, Marc Haber wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing them >>> first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the >>> disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >>> >> No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with >> nothing worth stealing might... > > Corporations still act on the customs of the 2000 years because using > their brains costs money that doesn't land in budgets where the money > to destroy disks is already booked. > No., They have the wisdom of age. Crushing a disk loses maybe $20. Having a disks data stolen could cots them $billions There is no way to be assured other than by doing $10,000 worth of testing that a disks data has completely been destroyed beyond foresnic recovery, but if the disk is crushed there is certainty. Likewise the audit trails to determine whether or not the disk held any sensitive data or not are expensive to maintain and even more to trace. $20 is a small price to pay for certainty > Greetings > Marc -- The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property. Karl Marx
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 02:06 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <4R-dndlP7cWzrBD3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90450 |
On 8/24/26 06:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 23/08/2026 20:20, Marc Haber wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing >>>> them >>>> first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or the >>>> disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >>>> >>> No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with >>> nothing worth stealing might... >> >> Corporations still act on the customs of the 2000 years because using >> their brains costs money that doesn't land in budgets where the money >> to destroy disks is already booked. >> > No., They have the wisdom of age. > Crushing a disk loses maybe $20. Having a disks data stolen could cots > them $billions > There is no way to be assured other than by doing $10,000 worth of > testing that a disks data has completely been destroyed beyond foresnic > recovery, but if the disk is crushed there is certainty. Look - IT DEPENDS. If you're Joe's Garage then you don't NEED "extensive testing" to ensure the drive is un-readable - NOBODY CARES. If you're like a bank, then you have to put in a little more effort. The Spooks probably literally melt 'em down - they are MAJOR targets for MAJOR hostile players. > Likewise the audit trails to determine whether or not the disk held any > sensitive data or not are expensive to maintain and even more to trace. Again, 99%, far more complicated than needed. > $20 is a small price to pay for certainty "Certainty" is something close to Hillary's Silver Hammer. BANG BANG Hillary's Silver Hammer came down upon those phones ..... :-) However "way good enough" for 99% ... ONE whack with a ball-peen hammer WILL do it. I had a shop, so the 'drill bit solution' was very quick and handy. Nobody anywhere REALLY cared what was on those drives - but HAD to at least make a little effort.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 12:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116jtmf$3l7js$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90489 |
On 25/08/2026 07:06, c186282 wrote: > "Certainty" is something close to Hillary's Silver > Hammer. > > BANG BANG Hillary's Silver Hammer came down upon > those phones ..... 🙂 > > However "way good enough" for 99% ... ONE whack > with a ball-peen hammer WILL do it. It all depends on the anticipated cost of any data theft. Mots PCs fro9m private individuals at worst will drain a few grand from their bank account. But for a corporation it could be their entire customer list, or the blueprints for next years missiles. Industrial *shredders* that reduce disk platters or NAND flash chips to irreassemblable near dust, take the sort of data recovery we use on the dead sea scroll fragments or worse. By the time its decoded the data is already obsolete -- “it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism (or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans, about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a 'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,' a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian utopia of 1984.” Vaclav Klaus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joed Oakes <lost@noway.home.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 19:42 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116g0gm$2as37$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90392 |
On 8/23/26 08:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: >>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>>>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>>>>> way - HAMMER :-) >>>>> >>>>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. >>>> >>>> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a >>>> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. >>> >>> My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from >>> here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I won’t >>> have the opportunity to destroy it. >> >> Exactly. >> >> And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done. > > It is UNIVERSALLY done in the UK. > Insurance will be voided, contracts lost and people will get fired if > it is not. > > The big sources of usable hardware are BIG corporates - banks, insurance > companies, travel agencies... they dump a thousand machines a year to > recycling companies who sign in blood that the disk will be CRUSHED. > >> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing >> them first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or >> the disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >> > No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with > nothing worth stealing might... 20 years ago where I worked we used the hammer and drill approach, but that was NEVER environmentally responsible. NOTE that Western Digital runs a drive recycling program for EOL hard drives. They may not pay you money, but they do offer credits on new hard drives. Considering that China is constricting the availability of rare earth magnets now I think it behooves us to recycle these drives whenever possible. WD claims to wipe the drives on arrival, but I still run dd -if /dev/urandom of=/dev/xxx multiple times on anything I send them... Aside from that, I keep all my hard drives encrypted at rest. -- "Build a man a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Terry Pratchett, Discworld
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-23 23:56 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <116g1bk$2apg7$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90418 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 19:42:12 -0400, Joed Oakes wrote: > 20 years ago where I worked we used the hammer and drill approach, > but that was NEVER environmentally responsible. NOTE that Western > Digital runs a drive recycling program for EOL hard drives. They may > not pay you money, but they do offer credits on new hard drives. There are third-party companies who undertake legally-binding contracts to erase all data on used drives before reselling them. A client of mine gets lots of drives from such a source. Here <https://shop.core.net.nz/products/lenovo-2ru-x3650-m5-rack-server> is an example of the sort of hardware he puts them in. That takes one or two expansion cabinets as well, for an extra 24 drives in each.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 02:25 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <l9icnfTKBY2aeRb3nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90419 |
On 8/23/26 19:56, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 19:42:12 -0400, Joed Oakes wrote: > >> 20 years ago where I worked we used the hammer and drill approach, >> but that was NEVER environmentally responsible. NOTE that Western >> Digital runs a drive recycling program for EOL hard drives. They may >> not pay you money, but they do offer credits on new hard drives. > > There are third-party companies who undertake legally-binding > contracts to erase all data on used drives before reselling them. Umm .. CAUTION. That contract clause doesn't mean THEY can't pirate the drives BEFORE they re-sell 'em ! > A client of mine gets lots of drives from such a source. Here > <https://shop.core.net.nz/products/lenovo-2ru-x3650-m5-rack-server> is > an example of the sort of hardware he puts them in. That takes one or > two expansion cabinets as well, for an extra 24 drives in each. Screw 'responsible' - SMASH old drives. DID salvage a lot of neo magnets from old drives however. HATE to waste those.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 01:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <nf1k7aF5rktU26@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90418 |
On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 19:42:12 -0400, Joed Oakes wrote: > WD claims to wipe the drives on arrival, but I still run dd -if > /dev/urandom of=/dev/xxx multiple times on anything I send them... Madame Clinton recommends BitBleach.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 09:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <hm9tlmxisg.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #90418 |
On 2026-08-24 01:42, Joed Oakes wrote:
> On 8/23/26 08:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>>> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
>>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme
>>>>>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton
>>>>>>> way - HAMMER :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a
>>>>> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key.
>>>>
>>>> My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from
>>>> here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I
>>>> won’t
>>>> have the opportunity to destroy it.
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done.
>>
>> It is UNIVERSALLY done in the UK.
>> Insurance will be voided, contracts lost and people will get fired if
>> it is not.
>>
>> The big sources of usable hardware are BIG corporates - banks,
>> insurance companies, travel agencies... they dump a thousand machines
>> a year to recycling companies who sign in blood that the disk will be
>> CRUSHED.
>>
>>> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing
>>> them first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten,
>>> or the disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such
>>> accidents.
>>>
>> No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies
>> with nothing worth stealing might...
>
> 20 years ago where I worked we used the hammer and drill approach, but
> that was NEVER environmentally responsible. NOTE that Western Digital
> runs a drive recycling program for EOL hard drives. They may not pay
> you money, but they do offer credits on new hard drives.
>
> Considering that China is constricting the availability of rare earth
> magnets now I think it behooves us to recycle these drives whenever
> possible.
>
> WD claims to wipe the drives on arrival, but I still run dd -if /dev/
> urandom of=/dev/xxx multiple times on anything I send them...
man urandom
When read, the /dev/urandom device returns random bytes using
a pseudorandom number generator seeded from the entropy pool. Reads
from this device do not block (i.e., the CPU is not yielded), but can
incur an appreciable delay when requesting large amounts of data.
My utility in pascal is faster than this, it does not wait.
>
> Aside from that, I keep all my hard drives encrypted at rest.
>
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 00:56 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <4R-dnd9P7cVvvRD3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90445 |
On 8/24/26 03:50, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-08-24 01:42, Joed Oakes wrote: >> On 8/23/26 08:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>> On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>>>> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: >>>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>>>>>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>>>>>>> way - HAMMER :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by >>>>>> holding a >>>>>> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. >>>>> >>>>> My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from >>>>> here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I >>>>> won’t >>>>> have the opportunity to destroy it. >>>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> >>>> And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done. >>> >>> It is UNIVERSALLY done in the UK. >>> Insurance will be voided, contracts lost and people will get fired >>> if it is not. >>> >>> The big sources of usable hardware are BIG corporates - banks, >>> insurance companies, travel agencies... they dump a thousand machines >>> a year to recycling companies who sign in blood that the disk will be >>> CRUSHED. >>> >>>> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing >>>> them first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, >>>> or the disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such >>>> accidents. >>>> >>> No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies >>> with nothing worth stealing might... >> >> 20 years ago where I worked we used the hammer and drill approach, but >> that was NEVER environmentally responsible. NOTE that Western Digital >> runs a drive recycling program for EOL hard drives. They may not pay >> you money, but they do offer credits on new hard drives. >> >> Considering that China is constricting the availability of rare earth >> magnets now I think it behooves us to recycle these drives whenever >> possible. >> >> WD claims to wipe the drives on arrival, but I still run dd -if /dev/ >> urandom of=/dev/xxx multiple times on anything I send them... > > man urandom > > When read, the /dev/urandom device returns random bytes using > a pseudorandom number generator seeded from the entropy pool. Reads > from this device do not block (i.e., the CPU is not yielded), but can > incur an appreciable delay when requesting large amounts of data. > > My utility in pascal is faster than this, it does not wait. Yep. Still use Pascal pretty often :-) >> Aside from that, I keep all my hard drives encrypted at rest. Now I do NOT worry about people physically stealing my drives. That's just RARE. The problem is online spies. In that situation you have already unlocked those drives and they are open to being read. Now corps who let people put sensitive data onto laptops they will leave on a park bench, THEN encrypted drives are a good, important, tact.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-24 00:53 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: The hammer is best |
| Message-ID | <l9icnfjKBY0dUxb3nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90392 |
On 8/23/26 08:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 23/08/2026 12:55, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2026-08-23 11:14, Richard Kettlewell wrote: >>> gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: >>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>> are hidden buffers plus the wear-leveling scheme >>>>>> gets in the way. You wipe 'em the Hillary Clinton >>>>>> way - HAMMER :-) >>>>> >>>>> Instead, use encryption, on the device or the partitions. >>>> >>>> Hammer is better, because encryption can be worked around by holding a >>>> gun to the head of the person who knows the encryption key. >>> >>> My backup drives are encrypted. In principle they could be stolen from >>> here, from an offsite location or in transit and if that happens I won’t >>> have the opportunity to destroy it. >> >> Exactly. >> >> And in the typical business case, hammering of disks is not often done. > > It is UNIVERSALLY done in the UK. > Insurance will be voided, contracts lost and people will get fired if > it is not. Ok, still SOME intelligence in the UK ! :-) > The big sources of usable hardware are BIG corporates - banks, insurance > companies, travel agencies... they dump a thousand machines a year to > recycling companies who sign in blood that the disk will be CRUSHED. > >> Hard disks are simply repurposed, recycled, sold... usually zeroing >> them first. Encryption protects the case when zeroing is forgotten, or >> the disk breaks before that. Encryption protects against such accidents. >> > No, they are not. Not by corporations. Some Mickey Mouse companies with > nothing worth stealing might... Physical destruction IS best. This can actually be as simple as a hammer or cold chisel. However the drill-press approach will also getcha there, esp if the drill also ruins the physical mechanism for read/write. Almost all drives these days have it in the SAME location. Good sharp half-inch drillbit ... TWO seconds to ruin the drive. Oh, while for a little while they made HDDs with glass platters, almost all are aluminum. Even a quarter-inch hole, followed by a small drop of toilet-cleaning hydrochloric acid (a pinch of salt added is even better) will absolutely ROT aluminum platters Real Quick. Used to keep a little vial of the brew. Anyway, unless you're the CIA or such, nobody is gonna disassemble yer old drives and try to run a "head on a stick" over them to try and recover bits of data. Defensive measures should be in proportion to the RISK. CIA probably MELTS the things. Joe's Garage does not need to - one good whack with a ball-peen will do it very nicely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web