Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Peter Gutmann data deletion theaory? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:30:30 -0400 |
Here is a quote directly from Peter I received Saturday, he asked to have it passed on to the list. --------------Snip-------------------------
I'd love to hear some thoughts on this from security and data experts out there.
People should note the epilogue to the paper: 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 one or two levels via basic error-cancelling techniques. In particular the 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. Peter. --------------Snip------------------------- Dave Kleiman
| Previous by Date: | Re: Peter Gutmann data deletion theaory?, Casper . Dik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [BugTraq] Peter Gutmann data deletion theaory?, Volker Kuhlmann |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [BugTraq] Peter Gutmann data deletion theaory?, Volker Kuhlmann |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Peter Gutmann data deletion theaory?, Jeremy Epstein |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |