On 2010-03-06 22:10, Mark wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Ron Johnson <ron.l.john...@cox.net
<mailto:ron.l.john...@cox.net>> wrote:
[snip]
>We're allowed to question *spurious* justifications. If you'd
have said "for privacy concerns" instead of fear of "ghost/residual
files", the response would have been markedly different.
>
Interesting, so what is the difference in terms? Wouldn't the privacy
concerns be from residual files?
Yes, but... residual *files* just DO NOT EXIST ANYMORE after a mkfs.
What *can* exist, maybe, are residual *fragments* (blocks or
sectors, since the original inodes and index structures were wiped
away by the mkfs) which a clever forensic technician could maybe
piece back together,
So, zeroing out the partition is a reasonable operation for a /home
or /data partition (where you'd keep sensitive data), but not for
something as mundane as an OS-only / partition.
BTW, I like having a separate /data (or whatever you all it)
partition, and recommend that you also having a separate /home.
--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given
us arms." Mike Ditka
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b935482.80...@cox.net
