[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20031008194622.GA20433@citi.citi.umich.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:46:22 -0400
From: Rick Wash <rwash@...i.umich.edu>
To: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@...berkeley.edu>
Cc: Alun Jones <alun@...is.com>,
'Wojciech Purczynski' <cliph@...c.pl>,
'Michal Zalewski' <lcamtuf@...edump.cx>, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com,
secpapers@...urityfocus.com, vulnwatch@...nwatch.org,
vulndiscuss@...nwatch.org, full-disclosure@...sys.com
Subject: Re: [PAPER] Juggling with packets: floating data storage
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:03:20PM -0700, Nicholas Weaver wrote:
> So who cares? Why juggle when shelves hold so much more?
Just because you and I don't have a use for this doesn't make it useless.
This technique has one advantage that I can see being very useful -- it is
easy to delete large amounts of data quickly. Imagine you hear the feds
knocking on your door -- you just unplug your fiber, and let all the light
(aka your data) fly out into the room. Your data is gone, permanently.
If the latency is a minute, then it only takes a minute to delete everything
-- all 6.5 GB of data according to your calculations. Show me another
method that can delete 6.5 GB a data in a completely unrecoverable manner
that quickly. Hard drives need to be overwritten many times, but even then
they can still likely be recovered with enough money put toward it.
Rick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists