On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerar...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Unlike you, I read some stuff before posting. This is OLD NEWS:
No need to be rude. > > http://www.howtogeek.com/115573/htg-explains-why-you-only-have-to-wipe-a-disk-once-to-erase-it/ > > http://www.vidarholen.net/~vidar/overwriting_hard_drive_data.pdf > > to quote: > > " > Resultantly, if there is less than a 1% chance of determining each > character to be > recovered correctly, the chance of a complete 5-character word being > recovered drops > exponentially to 8.463E-11 (or less on a used drive and who uses a new > raw drive > format). This results in a probability of less than 1 chance in 10Exp50 > of recovering > any useful data. So close to zero for all intents and definitely not > within the realm of > use for forensic presentation to a court. > " > > 10^50. Think about that for a moment. And that is not 'all the data' but > 'any useful data'. > This really looks like a pragmatic argument, and not a theoretical one. I see no arguments based on hard laws of physics. This argument basically says that because this lab couldn't read the data with their equipment/methods, it is impossible for anybody to do it at any time in the future using any equipment. I'd say Schneier's Law applies. -- Rich
