pointertovoid

OK. The argument with the second law doesn't apply and was pseudo-science. The second law has nothing to do with puzzles, and everything to do with entropy, internal energy, temperature, enthalpy and the likes. You know, the integral of dQ/T. Now, the time needed. The attacker doesn't need to read every atom. Once he has found where the information was imperfectly erased on the whole track, that is, a bit outwards or a bit inwards, he needs to read a bunch of atoms per bit only at that imperfectly erased circle. The speed of a tunnel effect microscope can be over 10,000 atoms per second; it would seem logical that spin-sensitive STEM is about as fast, but I don't have the figures. The scale at a Hdd isn't what you describe. If the contiguous read is 150MB/s at 3.5" and 7200rpm, bits are some 20nm long including sync and redundancy, which still makes 100 atoms long, and tracks for 500GB platters are 180nm apart or 1000 atoms. Even if not every atom was oriented (this happens at a bigger scale with several Weiss domains) and some uncertainty remains, reading 100 atoms at one proper radius suffice to get the information free of noise. Nothing of a puzzle here. A badly (=single-pass zeros) erased HDD still contains the sector sync, the redundancy, the information bits recoverable by the spin-sensitive STEM. Once the attacker has read the sectors, he can reconstitute also the folders and files, still well-ordered. Reading a complete 500GB platters is still slow, but we don't have to image individual atoms here, rather groups of 100, and this must be faster. The reading machine being anyway specialized to rotate the platter instead of translating, it can also have many read tips. And since the partition table, partition header and file system is readable, the attacker can read only the files he wants. The spin-sensitive STEM is just the answer to smaller bits and perpendicular recording. All the rest is identical to information recovery on a damaged HDD or a damaged partition and is banal.

Thanks! I'll make a test with Tor at https://panopticlick.eff.org/ . Further observation meanwhile: Paypal refuses to open a session from Tor, so there is some means to distinguish it from other browsers.

I take good note of Nist's statement, paragraph 2.3 on page 6: "Basically the change in track density and the related changes in the storage medium have created a situation where the acts of clearing and purging the media have converged. That is, for ATA disk drives manufactured after 2001 (over 15 GB) clearing by overwriting the media once is adequate to protect the media from both keyboard and laboratory attack." Though, this document is from 2006. Did they have spin-sensitive tunnel effect microscopes back then? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_polarized_scanning_tunneling_microscopy the first referenced article dates from 2009. Such a microscope lets observe the magnetic polarization of single atoms, for instance at locations where the write head put the sensitive data, and that the erase pass didn't overfly accurately enough.

What lets you suppose and even write that? I'm an expert for electromagnetism and hold two MsC for electrical engineering, including microelectronics.

Now that sounds like a pseudo-science argument: "The 2nd law of Thermodynamics describes such a fact." Beware I'm a physicist and I'm easy with thermodynamics, as more people here may be. And citing that law didn't impress me Quite the opposite. Jaclaz has provided articles that did not tell what he claims. In fact, the author of the original paper still recommends presently two multi-pass erase software. Sorry but, after two pages of arguments and references, your one-line strong statement isn't convincing.

And no, I can't find a link, because my memories were wrong. The Tor team recommends Tor as it always did. Complete and sincere apologies. What stays is that the newspaper's blog can presently censor me despite Tor.

Thank you for your well-argumented and documented opinion!

Thank you!

Hello you all! I couldn't find the option to move the "Program files" folder in TeakUI v2.10 (also known as TweakXP) running on Xp as I used to do in W2k, so I moved the folder using TweakUI v1.33 (the one for W2k). Meanwhile the XP works imperfectly, and I don't have the computer at hand to experiment further. Hence the question: Can the "Program files" folder be moved in XP? Is it safe to do this?

Sad, but... From my observations, Tor is defeated in Europe. I'm covertly censored on one newspaper's blog. First noticed as some keywords combined with my name triggered an automatic censorship that raised a false "error 503" (further experiments showed that my messages passed through without my name, or by reformulating the contents, while my name and the keywords repeatably trigger the so-called error 503, even by retrying seconds apart). For some time I could continue posting by using other names. Then my IP address was censored, but I could go on by hiding my IP address using Tor. Just like in any other dictatorship, you know. Since Bernard Cazeneuve's visit to De Maizière and the subsequent European agreement (to combat terrorism of course), even Tor doesn't get through. From my observations, it could be that the European governmental agencies have identified nearly all the nodes of the Tor network. Keep also in mind that the Tor team now advises not to use it.

It wasn't my job and I was questioned over several fully unofficial channels, so I can and do speak about it. The query was about destroying hard disk drives because the owners feared the data could be recovered after erasure. Why they didn't want a multi-pass erasure, I don't know. The query was around 2010, definitely after 2004 and before 2012, but the scrapped disks can perfectly have been older than perpendicular recording - weapons for instance use old hardware often. And given the general degree of paranoia of the people who indirectly asked me how to destroy the Hdd (I strongly suppose the French secret services), it doesn't need a workable method of data recovery: they would destroy the disks just on the remote suspicion of a possibility. This latest linked document supports your claim that perpendicular recording makes one-pass erasure safe. Though, not all technology is known. For instance, tunnel effect microscopes can detect the spin of individual atoms. The latest Pdf's argument was about magnetization force, but tunnel microscopes would read locations where the write head didn't pass exactly over the data to overwrite it.

A single overwrite with zeroes is obviously enough against most attacks. On the other hand, "someone" (which means a secret service or a defence agency) questioned me few years ago over several channels, one of them linked with the French secret services, exactly about how to make disposed magnetic hard disk impossible to read, so at least the interrogation is very real if not the possibility. Also, people should tackle this potential risk depending on who the attacker can be, rather than depending on their own identity or activity. In 2017 you can't reasonably claim that secret services work against terrorists. This is not paranoia, it's thinking honestly within real life. Since overwriting a disk several times is no significant stress - only a big time consumption - I do recommend a safe erase to all people supposing a read attempt by a secret service, just like Peter Gutmann still does in the misquoted paper. ---------- Mind reading machines have been around for at least 30 years, about as long as the imaging radars they probably use to map the brain's activity in real time from a very limited distance. But since one can protect himself against these machines with a tinfoil hat, it's still useful to make disks unreadable, indeed. The study by MIT student is a bunch of nonsense produced by people too little skilled on electromagnetism. They even took argument of the propagation of a magnetic field at 200kHz to infer what should happen to an electromagnetic field at few GHz, the probable band of mind-reading devices. Nor is an attenuation a good argument when the goal is to prevent the acquisition of an image. Interestingly, you can observe how some people tell "tinfoil hat" as a synonym for "whacko". This is a method to suggest that tinfoil hats don't work or address a wrong concern. Better take a few plies of space blanket for you hat: it's more comfortable than aluminium foil and it resists corrosion.

You mean, over 4GB on 32-bit Xp? The Sp3 is a hint to the 32-bit version. So, using the Pae, each task (or application?) can access its own 4GB, like in Server Windows, up to the 64GB Dram, is that it?

Your quote is about using MFM, not about using any method. It stands that the author still recommends multi-pass erasure software. "No attack published" isn't the perfect argument. In 1975 the chief of an embassy's encrypted transmissions invited me in his department and told me about knowing what someone types on the keyboard or reads on the screen through the unwanted radiations. The public heard about "Tempest" in 1995 more or less, and it had been operational meanwhile, since some people used it during their military service. So, yes, things exist that the public isn't aware of, even over decades.

Fun. Offline computers can be useful for games too, but a PIII doesn't run recent ones. And, yes, I'd know someone who uses a computer to type letters, but she has already all she needs. I modernized her computer to 200MHz P1mmx, 128MB FPM, 7200rpm 80GB single-platter disk on RocketRaid-100 for UDMA, and installed W95b and o97 on it. Rock-solid for >10 years, <10s boot time, zero-delay Office. No need to propose her an upgrade.

Grazie Jaclaz! I should have made clearer that said PC would not be for me but for normal users without knowledge of hardware, OS and the like. This disqualifies Haiku for that job, despite the attempt is naturally sympathetic. I'll have a deeper look at Vector Linux. My short attempts with Kaella, Ubuntu (v9) and Mint (v14) were encouraging before these got bloated too, and for the users I consider, which have never had a computer, there is no compatibility worry. I just wonder if there is some small browser that displays the sites properly in 2017. Meanwhile, Firefox 50 on Xp takes 590MB just for Msfn, porca miseria! If not, that computer will still be fantastic offline, then with Win Me (8s boot) and Office 97 (no perceivable delay on first launch), but I know nobody needing an offline computer right now.

Thanks for the link to the paper! I read quite the opposite conclusions in it. The paper states that the "Epilogue" section(s) are updated. There, I read: "You never need to perform all 35 passes" [because you can target the specific writing method, so you can reduce the passes]. "For any modern PRML/EPRML drive, a few passes of random scrubbing is the best you can do". [My emphasis] In the Further Epilogue [my rewording]: other people didn't succeed reading data overwritten once. That's because they used the wrong technique. In the Recommendations: "to delete individual files under Windows I use Eraser" [which is a multi-pass eraser], "To erase entire drives I use DBAN" [again a multi-pass eraser] So unless I missed something, perpendicular recording didn't change the picture, and the author still recommends multipass erasure.

Presently, I have a PIII Tualatin computer on my desk, with no use. 1400MHz/133MHz/512kB Cpu (TDP 32W), oversized cooler, Ga-6oxt with i815ep+ich2, 512MB pc133 2-2-2-5, if needed R9600xt. Has worked flawlessly for the past 10 years until replacement 2 weeks ago.

Installing W2k from a Usb stick is known to be non-standard at all. There is a special project here just for that. Even to install W2ksp4 from a Cd drive on Usb rather than P-Ata or S-Ata, you can have worries. Some MS Usb patches exist just for that.

Thanks a lot for the download address of Google Earth 7.1.7.2606! It must be installed from a session with admin rights (if not, the installer fails silently...) then it runs from an Xp poweruser session and maybe from a normal user session, and is multilingual. Built-in display of Pdf in Firefox: yes, but it doesn't fill Pdf forms, that's why I do bother with Foxit. I've noted down carefully the archive pages for Firefox, Opera, Flash Player, Java. But as a seasoned W2k user, I want to warn the Xp users that archive webpages use to disappear without warning, don't mention the program's language all too often, give wrong information about what Windows can run the application, tend to become incomplete as time passes, and so on. It is paramount not to rely on them, but instead note down this information and store the complete installers on one's hard disk. Check for instance Google Earth's download page: it offers only v7.1 and v6.2, without any indication about what version fits W2k or W98-Me. Within 2 years, the information about Xp compatibility will be lost (7.1.7.2602 versus 7.1.7.2606 will become "take v7") and the full installers will have vanished. Right now is the proper time to download and make notes.

Hello nice people! I've just modernized my mum's PC for Christmas, and now I have a perfectly running old computer here and wonder what to do with it, especially whether that hardware can still surf on the Internet. The 1400MHz PIII would still suffice, the excellent P-Ata mechanical disk is as fast as a usual current S-Ata one... BUT the Dram is limited to 512MB buy the North bridge (i815ep). Is there an OS that fits in 512MB Dram with its browser and is reasonably up-to-date (or rather, safe) in 2017? I'm essentially from the Windows world and the answer with the Microsoft option is a clear NO. Any possibility with Linux or other? Thank you!

My elements of answer: Writing 3TB even once takes time. At favourable 100MB/s, the absolute minimum is 8h. Anything shorter would not have overwritten the disk. This is the time needed by the Ata command, which is the best choice because you know what it does. Accessible by the manufacturer's software, often a bootable Cd whose burnable image can be downloaded from the manufacturer's website. Overwriting everything once is not a safe erase, depending on who might read your disks using what methods. "Safe" tends to imply half a dozen of overwrites - 8h each. Files on SSD and Flash media are impossible to safely erase by the overwriting tools, because of their wear levelling algorithm. You must fill the medium with garbage - and do something for the folders.

If someone knows a way to access >512MB with an i815ep North Bridge, please tell! I modernized a Pc recently to E6850+P45 because of that, and now I have a complete cute Tualatin+815ep+ich2+512MB that can't go on the Internet hence is little useful.

Siv and Siw here too - but usually, reading the marks on the boards or chips is faster and easier. I use Siv and Siw more to now the device and vendor identities, to know better if a driver fits and why. Last time for a Geforce 8400 GS but v3, which is a Gf210 chip - completely different driver. It remains a headache.

Avast Free here too, for years on several computers. I dislike some additions they made meanwhile, like website reputation and so on, but these can be switched off. It just takes more time and attention at installation. The present v2016 runs on Xp and up, not W2k. Recently I noticed v2016 slowed down one machine but didn't investigate; v2014 didn't - possibly because I switched off some shared reputation feature so Avast now scans every file. Since Avast Free has been around, I see few reasons to pay for an antivirus. Depending on the test, Kaspersky may be slightly better. An added advantage is that is comes from Russia, hence may better reject the malware developed by European or US agencies - but to sell in Europe I fear they have to put holes in their protection. I won't take BitDefender any more, never-ever. Once I installed the Universalis Encyclopedia, which brought that #@*!! C-Dilla on my computer. When I told BitDefender's firewall to stop C-Dilla calling home, C-Dilla just destroyed BitDefender's firewall, which then let everything through. I don't want to know if BitDefender improved that. A curse on their moustache! Comodo as a firewall. Since I don't mind older versions for the firewall, and keep them with care, I can still install it on W2k and older.