How to modify the "SHIFT+DEL-Command"

[HØLLØW]

Hey guys,

is it possible to modify the "SHIFT+DEL-Command" in that way, that it uses "Eraser" to delete files instead of the windows file deletion?

I just modified the recycle-bin that it displays "Empty Recycle Bin" in the context menu, and uses the 35-Pass Gutman-Method in silent mode to empty the recycle bin.

Thank you for your help and sorry for my english...

[HØLLØW]

No ideas out there?

[jaclaz]

No ideas out there?

Only an OT one.

I just modified the recycle-bin that it displays "Empty Recycle Bin" in the context menu, and uses the 35-Pass Gutman-Method in silent mode to empty the recycle bin.

i.e. found a way to unneededly put stress on system and hard disk.

Compare with this:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/secure_del.html

Epilogue

In the time since this paper was published, some people have treated the 35-pass overwrite technique described in it more as a kind of voodoo incantation to banish evil spirits than the result of a technical analysis of drive encoding techniques. As a result, they advocate applying the voodoo to PRML and EPRML drives even though it will have no more effect than a simple scrubbing with random data. In fact performing the full 35-pass overwrite is pointless for any drive since it targets a blend of scenarios involving all types of (normally-used) encoding technology, which covers everything back to 30+-year-old MFM methods (if you don't understand that statement, re-read the paper). If you're using a drive which uses encoding technology X, you only need to perform the passes specific to X, and you never need to perform all 35 passes. 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.

Looking at this from the other point of view, with the ever-increasing data density on disk platters and a corresponding reduction in feature size and use of exotic techniques to record data on the medium, it's unlikely that anything can be recovered from any recent drive except perhaps a single level via basic error-cancelling techniques. In particular the drives in use at the time that this paper was originally written have mostly fallen out of use, so the methods that applied specifically to the older, lower-density technology don't apply any more. Conversely, with modern high-density drives, even if you've got 10KB of sensitive data on a drive and can't erase it with 100% certainty, the chances of an adversary being able to find the erased traces of that 10KB in 80GB of other erased traces are close to zero.

more comments here:

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=108779

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=125900

jaclaz

[HØLLØW]

OK...

[jaclaz]

What about using Winkeys:

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000378.html

http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enh...ts/WinKey.shtml

and map the function to an unused Winkey combo?

It should be possible to re-connect shift+del to something else, like Mozilla can do:

http://purgecontrol.mozdev.org/

Or maybe remap SHIFT+DEL to something else?

http://webpages.charter.net/krumsick/

I am not aware of a specific solution.

jaclaz