[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3af3d47c1001260804v53d12ad7u8d0368413e5fb3f4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:04:46 +0100
From: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@...il.com>
To: Michael Holstein <michael.holstein@...ohio.edu>
Cc: full-disclosure <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Disk wiping -- An alternate approach?
I was thinking, since all this (reasonable) fuss on wiping a disk over 10
times to ensure non-readability, how come we're yet very limited on space
usage?
If, for example, I overwrote a bitmap file with a text one, what stops the
computer from recovering/storing both (without using additional space)?
Just a couple curiosities of mine.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Michael Holstein <
michael.holstein@...ohio.edu> wrote:
>
> > By the way, does somebody knows about the flash memory?
> > Is zeroing a whole usb key enough to make the data unrecoverable?
> >
>
> No, wear-leveling (done at the memory controller level) will dynamically
> re-map addresses on the actual flash chip to ensure a relatively
> consistent number of write cycles across the entire drive.
>
> The only way to completely "wipe" a flash disk is with a hammer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Holstein
> Cleveland State University
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
Content of type "text/html" skipped
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists