| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 58016 | 2005-05-19 01:55:00 | Removing Residual data from Decommissioned Computers | CreightonBrown (5692) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 356581 | 2005-05-19 03:04:00 | Ideally there would be quantifications of procedures of: Say for HDD: Erasure Degausing Destruction and they would spread both of security gain, income, expense, time or other ramification as appropriate. I, or others, would probably in an ideal sense would have more logic in this regard. Although it could vary by the methods implied so may have to be quanified with some variational likelyhood or more test material which would be an appropriate ideal to achieve. |
CreightonBrown (5692) | ||
| 356582 | 2005-05-19 03:05:00 | Sounds like you could kill quite a few HDs to everyone's satisfaction in the time to read and make sense of Creighton's letter... If this has to be done not once but atleast thousands of times one may want to undertake an appropriate degree of assessment and concern for it, which is what I assumed I tried to do. |
CreightonBrown (5692) | ||
| 356583 | 2005-05-19 03:13:00 | I have done a little bit of work for government offices in my local area, when I have removed hard drives for them they are either put into storage or sent to a firm that specializes in destroying them.... Still, Lets not let the real world interfere.... 'Real world' experience has raised my concern over what was being done in a firm I was employed for, in a trial phase, which was to recomission computers to t he public. I became concerned with the issues, and as such tried to present this information to government to protect individuals and the conglomeration of those who may be affected e.g. society, government. |
CreightonBrown (5692) | ||
| 356584 | 2005-05-19 03:19:00 | Preface - Regarding assistance from refurbishment firms One has to consider the biases concerned, ideally we would not live in a bias world but unfortunately we are implicated from our actions. As such I would state it seems psychologically likely than under normal circumstances individuals may not wish to partake in the facilitation of matters which may lead to a psychologically disadvantaging scenario, perhaps by other measures too such as economics or otherwise. Therefore I believe my contact to recommend to a refurbishment provider that standards should be established may be against their own financial wellbeing and as far as presently known are not require to meet any formalized standard and or formalized standard with accountability to achieve the appropriate ethicacy standard for the issue of data Remanence. This guy is sitting too far from the blackboard What a crock of s**t I have SC, UE, an Advanced Trade certificate, and 3 internationally recognised IT degrees And I don't know what he just said, he's obviously on a higher plane than me! Or has access to a better class of drug than I do. But apart from that, whats the point of posting all this drivel at all? I think I'm missing something (so they tell me) |
bartsdadhomer (80) | ||
| 356585 | 2005-05-19 03:20:00 | Why would you want to overwrite and degauss a disk and then physically destroy it, when you can simply just physically destroy it? You would only overwrite the HD if you were planning to re-sell it as a blank. If your security-conscious clients found out about this, you won't have the contract very long. If you were planning to re-sell them, you could build an overwriting server to do just that. A few motherboards lined up all with HD ribbon connectors that can connect multiple-HDs, and running a formatting and zero-writing program. Leave it overnight or a couple of days and presto!... |
vinref (6194) | ||
| 356586 | 2005-05-19 03:25:00 | I have expressed the ideas as i wanted to communicate them. I assume no one here seems to be suitably trained to add further to correct professional data security knowledge gain to further enhance this topic for me. If they did have the appropriate training of data removal to an expert level I would welcome contact from them if they could add this topic further. For now it seems I have communicated the ideas as best as suitable for the time being and I will be unsubcribing from this thread. |
CreightonBrown (5692) | ||
| 356587 | 2005-05-19 03:30:00 | LMAO. | Metla (12) | ||
| 356588 | 2005-05-19 03:36:00 | LMAO. ditto..... |
bartsdadhomer (80) | ||
| 356589 | 2005-05-19 03:37:00 | Take it easy Creighton. Some of us do take the topic seriously. And yes I did read the whole of your letter. And I was interested in the Gutmann method a while back, but I quickly realised that if you were that conscious about security, don't bother with any overwriting tricks - just destroy the disk. It says just as much in the article/letter you posted. |
vinref (6194) | ||
| 356590 | 2005-05-19 03:49:00 | Formatting, writing zero's, degaussing (unless you feed the national grid into it), etc, all leave recoverable data on a magnet disc. Smash and burn baby is the only way to go. What is medium or low security data from such as the MOD, for eg, who audits it, who pays for the audit, eg: What data was on the machine before it's current low-medium security status, who has access to the machine during it's life and what was their security status during that time? No hardrive is worth that kind of effort even for low security machines, it's even doubtfull if it's worth taking it out of the machine, except if you burn the whole thing you run foul of environmental laws and reg's. Smash and burn the buggers. On second thoughts, the most sensitive information on Govt computers is probably pornographic emails. Give them all to the s**t slinger in Parliament, that should keep his trap shut for a few years in more way than one :eek: |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||