Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
Thanks Barry
Hi
2008/10/3 Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk:
Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
You want 'shred'. :)
might be in the coreutils package - not sure.
- Srdjan
On Friday 03 October 2008 15:43:57 Barrys linux mail wrote:
Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
http://abaababa.ouvaton.org/wipe/ is quite common.
Barrys linux mail wrote:
Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
Thanks Barry
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
If you have Krusader installed (a KDE based MIdnight Commander clone), you'll find a Shred function there if you like something GUI based. I've never used it so can't vouch for it but I assume it does what it says
Regards
Mark
On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:43:57 +0100 Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk allegedly wrote:
Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
Thanks Barry
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
GPG offers gives you "kgpg -X %u" (if you install Kgpg....).
/But/ I recall reading somewhere that no file shredder will completely obliterate your files if you are using a journaling FS such as ext3. Modern disk forensics may allow a skilled operator to recover your "deleted" data.
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi
2008/10/3 mbm mbm@rlogin.net:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:43:57 +0100 Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk allegedly wrote:
/But/ I recall reading somewhere that no file shredder will completely obliterate your files if you are using a journaling FS such as ext3.
Nothing to stop you remounting the filesystem as ext2, then shred your files, do multiple syncs, then remount as ext3.
Modern disk forensics may allow a skilled operator to recover your "deleted" data.
They might be able to recover the data because AFAIR ext3 does not clear the data blocks - it only resets the metadata to a state that shows that/those data block[s] as unused. On disk, the data does exist, until it is eventually overwritten.
- Srdjan
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 17:30:35 +0100 "Srdjan Todorovic" todorovic.s@googlemail.com allegedly wrote:
Nothing to stop you remounting the filesystem as ext2, then shred your files, do multiple syncs, then remount as ext3.
Hmmm. Not quite as simple as Barry's windows file shredder on XP. Probably never catch on :-)
M ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The message 48E62FAD.9080704@tiscali.co.uk from Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk contains these words:
Hi. As I am in the process of moving completely from xp to Ubuntu Linux I wondered if there is a Linux alternative for my windows file shredder software ( which will overwrite files several times to make them unrecoverable). as I have been stumped on replacing this program which I value greatly as a security item.
Lifted from a post in one of the Zetnet newsgroups:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda
but from the point of view of getting rid of data, it'd be better to run
dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hda
a few times (for suitable value of "few"), to repeatedly overwrite with random bits instead.
Comment:
Actually, you'd use /dev/urandom rather than /dev/random, as the latter doesn't yield much in the way of data before stopping (waiting for more randomness to happen).
Hi
2008/10/3 Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk:
The message 48E62FAD.9080704@tiscali.co.uk from Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk contains these words:
Lifted from a post in one of the Zetnet newsgroups:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda
Which is OK if you want to nuke everything on the disk (or partition of you give it a partition number). But if you want to shred specific files... it won't do unless you call dd on each file (adjusting bs and count to match filesize).
but from the point of view of getting rid of data, it'd be better to run
dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hda
Which is extremely slow (at least here...)
[srdjant@tigerclaw ~]$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=10 10+0 records in 10+0 records out 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 2.50551 s, 4.2 MB/s
/dev/zero is much faster. You could do one pass of dding from /dev/zero, and then several passes of urandom (if you were that paranoid).
- Srdjan
There is an undiscussed question lurking behind all this. What is the process when one "overwrites" an existing file?
[A] For instance, if I have an existing file file.foo (say 14253 bytes) and I do
cat file.bar > file.foo [file.bar also 14253 bytes]
does it first write to a new disk region, delete the old filename file.foo from its inode, and then name the new inode file.bar? Or does it start writing the bytes in file.bar into the same disk space as file.foo, i.e. literally overwriting the same disk space?
[B] Whatever the answer to [A], what happens if you do
dd if=file.bar of=file.foo
I would presume that a utility like 'shred' would first take the trouble to locate the disk-space used by file.foo, in detail, and then directly access the HD hardware to write directly to the target sectors.
Depending on the answers to these questions, it may or may not be effective to do, say, dd if=file.bar of=file.foo
Ted.
On 03-Oct-08 17:37:05, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
Hi
2008/10/3 Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk:
The message 48E62FAD.9080704@tiscali.co.uk from Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk contains these words:
Lifted from a post in one of the Zetnet newsgroups:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda
Which is OK if you want to nuke everything on the disk (or partition of you give it a partition number). But if you want to shred specific files... it won't do unless you call dd on each file (adjusting bs and count to match filesize).
but from the point of view of getting rid of data, it'd be better to run
dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hda
Which is extremely slow (at least here...)
[srdjant@tigerclaw ~]$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=10 10+0 records in 10+0 records out 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 2.50551 s, 4.2 MB/s
/dev/zero is much faster. You could do one pass of dding from /dev/zero, and then several passes of urandom (if you were that paranoid).
- Srdjan
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 03-Oct-08 Time: 18:54:21 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
The message a59829110810031037s54dfde38k7a82482a133162dc@mail.gmail.com from "Srdjan Todorovic" todorovic.s@googlemail.com contains these words:
2008/10/3 Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk:
The message 48E62FAD.9080704@tiscali.co.uk from Barrys linux mail bazubuntumail@tiscali.co.uk contains these words:
Lifted from a post in one of the Zetnet newsgroups:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda
Which is OK if you want to nuke everything on the disk (or partition of you give it a partition number). But if you want to shred specific files... it won't do unless you call dd on each file (adjusting bs and count to match filesize).
I gathered that the idea was to nuke everything, BICHBW.
but from the point of view of getting rid of data, it'd be better to run
dd if=/dev/random of=/dev/hda
Which is extremely slow (at least here...)
Ah, the joys of a 286!
[srdjant@tigerclaw ~]$ dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null bs=1M count=10 10+0 records in 10+0 records out 10485760 bytes (10 MB) copied, 2.50551 s, 4.2 MB/s
/dev/zero is much faster. You could do one pass of dding from /dev/zero, and then several passes of urandom (if you were that paranoid).
Yes, this is what I was going to do - with the paranoid bit added in.
I'm putting a 'new' box together and I have a number of large (well, larger than most of the ones in this box) secondhand drives which I want to incorporate (fiver each from a local pootershop).
You never know what might be on them innit.
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 10:17:44 +0100 Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk allegedly wrote:
I'm putting a 'new' box together and I have a number of large (well, larger than most of the ones in this box) secondhand drives which I want to incorporate (fiver each from a local pootershop).
You never know what might be on them innit.
I can recommend "Forensic Recovery" by Farmer and Venema.....
Best disk wiper is a bloody great degausser, followed by an angle grinder, then a 20 lb hammer, then a furnace.
(But still worry)
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this?
Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The message 20081004113056.17db6f2c@shed.rlogin.net from mbm mbm@rlogin.net contains these words:
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 10:17:44 +0100 Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk allegedly wrote: =20
I'm putting a 'new' box together and I have a number of large (well, larger than most of the ones in this box) secondhand drives which I want to incorporate (fiver each from a local pootershop). =20 You never know what might be on them innit. =20
I can recommend "Forensic Recovery" by Farmer and Venema.....
Best disk wiper is a bloody great degausser, followed by an angle grinder, then a 20 lb hammer, then a furnace.=20
(But still worry)
Coo! I want a copy of that pre-vapourisation system restore pogrom!
Where can I get a copy? Dibblery, or MI#?