Slashdot Mirror


Death On Demand Drive Tech

Xanderoth writes "Engadget has an article on 'Dead on Demand' technology to destroy your disk drive should it be compromised by any number of ways. From the article: 'Configurable triggers such as removal or tampering of the drive, removal of device from a resting GPS point, cellular telephone call, or even a change in temperature will release a chemical mist into the drive (not the computer) destroying it layer by layer.' Of course the drives, due out next year, are expected to be priced between $2,500 to $9,000 each, plus a yearly fee."

287 comments

  1. not4chan by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 1, Troll

    The regulars on not4chan should be pleased.

    --
    Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
    1. Re:not4chan by Genin · · Score: 1

      notharbl

      --
      I am forced to conclude you are the master of the obvious. May others take heed of your wisdom.
    2. Re:not4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me tell you about the time I walked across the Atlantic Ocean and broke Soviet Russia in half over my knee. -Abraham Lincoln

  2. "plus a yearly fee" ... by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Uhm ... or they destroy the harddrive themselves?

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    1. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by Skater · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, the summary sounded pretty interesting, but the "...plus a yearly fee" tacked on the end added an ominous tone.

    2. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Ominous" is a fitting word...

      "Nice hard drives you have there....it'd be a shame if something were to...happen...to them..."
      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    3. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by ottothecow · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Oh shit, nobody tell the boss but I think I just hit the wrong speed-dial"

      --
      Bottles.
    4. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by c_oflynn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Article submitter is a sensationlist moron. The yearly fee is for somethng completely different talked about in the article.

      "Other solutions exist to delete data or lock the computer if a user enters too many failed passwords or does not login at all over a specified length of time -- Beachhead Solutions will sell you their offering for $129 a year per computer."

    5. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by MinutiaeMan · · Score: 1

      Even worse, what happens if someone accidentally dials a wrong number?

    6. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by markwalling · · Score: 1

      what if you need to move your computer out from under your desk so you can install your new video card?

      --
      ...For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.
    7. Re:"plus a yearly fee" ... by Acts+of+Attrition · · Score: 2
      The yearly fee covers them having to come and recover all your data when the drive frequently accidentally self-destructs.

      They also make money selling this recovery technique to your enemies.

  3. Death On Demand Drive Tech? by mpontes · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Death On Demand Drive Tech? Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?

    --
    Bored? Browse Slashdot with a +6 modifier for Troll comme
    1. Re:Death On Demand Drive Tech? by katana · · Score: 1

      Maybe Macs. You could advertise that when the feature is activated the hard drive Just Doesn't Work.

    2. Re:Death On Demand Drive Tech? by sendai2ci · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These drives aren't aimed at destroying it's contents from a remote attack, they are for when the drive is about to be physically removed from it's environs (or a similar situation.)

      Practically no system is secure from an attack by someone who knows what they are doing when that person is in front of it. Does not matter if it's a Mac, Linux, OpenBSD, etc.

    3. Re:Death On Demand Drive Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to check your sense of humor, he took the joke from this article. ;)

    4. Re:Death On Demand Drive Tech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love it when a new cliche comes together.

  4. Aaaargh! What happen??? by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 2, Funny
    Here's how the post was supposed to look...sorry about that...

    From TFA:

    Configurable triggers such as removal or tampering of the drive, removal of device from a resting GPS point, cellular telephone call, or even a change in temperature will release a chemical mist into the drive (not the computer) destroying it layer by layer.
    Damnit! I had this exact same idea over a year ago!
    Actually, it wasn't exactly the same...*my* idea involved C4.

    ....which makes it EVEN BETTER , IMNSHO...

    If I had just marketed it, I'd be in Aruba by now....*sigh*

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

  5. Clearly, I can see ... by Frit+Mock · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... quite a lot of cyber-attack possibilities.

    What drive do you want to nuke today?

    1. Re:Clearly, I can see ... by StrayJay · · Score: 1

      I don't see it. 128 bit UUIDs/GUIDs have been around for this sort of purpose for quite some time.

      --
      If you're old enough to get screwed, you should be old enough to get hammered.
    2. Re:Clearly, I can see ... by sendai2ci · · Score: 1

      Yah, that what I'm thinking, what sort of exploits can you shove into the system to make it kill it-self.

      Doesn't matter if they have backups and redundancies, it will still slow what ever operations the systems are running down a tad (or at the least make it less efficient.)

  6. Configurable triggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Configurable triggers such as warranty + 1?

  7. Can't wait for the first Windows malware... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...that looks for these drives and triggers the self-destruct if it finds any.

    1. Re:Can't wait for the first Windows malware... by dsanfte · · Score: 1

      It sure wouldn't spread very far destroying its hosts, now would it? Kind of like how Ebola never spreads very far, due to the high lethality and low incubation period.

      --
      occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
    2. Re:Can't wait for the first Windows malware... by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Depends. A virus that just destroys these drives wouldn't spread very far, but a virus that destroys these drives along with other nasty affects would spread fairly well.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  8. Notice: Your annual fee is past due by Message+Board · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Please make payment immediately to avoid automatic loss of data.

    Please note that this is for your protection - since if your drive is not protected against theft, we will activate the antitheft device to ensure that your data won't fall into the wrong hands.

  9. Oh, so THAT's why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that's why Indiana Jones couldn't take the Grail with him...

    1. Re:Oh, so THAT's why... by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      I think that having the floor of the room open to a bottomless pit when the machine is moved would make a great anti-theft device ... I could save staffing costs by letting go all of the thousand year old guys with swords!

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
  10. Technology in use for years... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I swear every Maxtor drive I've ever had has this feature...

    Any number of triggers activate self destruct mode...

    Defragging the hard drive
    Installing a new OS
    Turning the machine on

    1. Re:Technology in use for years... by Andrewkov · · Score: 1
      Yeah, it seems the only diffrence between a $149 drive and a $9,000 drive is the ability to control *when* it will die.

      I wonder if one these new drives dies without being triggered (all drives die eventually..), would you get a refund? ;-)

    2. Re:Technology in use for years... by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      I've used Maxtors that are quite smart. They realize that by allowing me to put data on it, it would be possible to compromise it, so they don't allow me to read or write right out of the box.

    3. Re:Technology in use for years... by HermanAB · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is amazing that the only drives that ever died on me were Maxtor and Fujitsu (bad chip) devices. As for all the other brands - eventually I just wished they would die.

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
    4. Re:Technology in use for years... by runderwo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting that you mention that. I have had three consecutive failures of a 200GB Maxtor drive, and the drive that failed prior to this one was a Fujitsu 6.4GB drive that had been in service for many years. The symptom was that when power was applied, the drive would repeatedly spin up and spin down without ever coming online. Against popular wisdom, I obtained a second Fujitsu drive with the same model number on eBay, and swapped the drive PCB. Amazingly, I was able to recover all of the data without a single problem.

    5. Re:Technology in use for years... by psymastr · · Score: 0

      Way to go! FUD companies with AC! Modded up, too!

      --
      Improve at backgammon rapidly through addictive quickfire position quizzes: www.bgtrain.com
    6. Re:Technology in use for years... by Pusene · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have done this myself with several drives, and it has a 80% success rate. No weird sounds==error on PCB. For all those other kind of drives, throw them in the freezer for 10 minutes. This can get them going long enough to copy all the important stuff from them. When it heats up it will fail again, so be quick about it... The fun part is, you can charge customers A LOT of money for doing this to their dead drive.

      --
      Error #13: No coffee. Operator halted. Please place boot device at bottom.
    7. Re:Technology in use for years... by runderwo · · Score: 1

      I've been told that you can't do the PCB swap with newer Fujitsu drives, which is why the success actually surprised me. Oh well, that one's in the past, so now I get to try to recover my 200GB drive when the replacement arrives.

    8. Re:Technology in use for years... by Da+Wrecka · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      Just to be devil's advocate (and admittedly off-topic) out of the 10 or so Maxtor hard drives I've had in the last 10 years or so, only two have EVER failed and that was due to piss-poor ventilation leading to incredible temperatures in the drive itself (these were 4GB and 5GB dinosaurs by today's standards that threw out loads of heat) in a shitty bottom-of-the-pack desktop (as opposed to tower) chassis. The third drive I got, I ran it with the case off - didn't fail until years after it had actually been replaced with a bigger one.

      --
      Napalm sticks to children.
  11. Why Bother? by eno2001 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just buy a Maxtor and all you have to do to destroy your data is... use it. ;P

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
    1. Re:Why Bother? by djdanlib · · Score: 4, Funny

      Looks like you can't trust Seagate or IBM, either. I've had both of those die very quickly off the shelf as well. And don't forget about floppies, because drop them a half inch, take them into another room, or look at them crosseyed and poof! Then there's CDs that rot away all the time. Don't even mention DVDs. Oops.

      That's why I now use an automated system involving monks and papyrus scrolls for all my data.

      Those famous dead sea scrolls lasted how long?

    2. Re:Why Bother? by kc32 · · Score: 1

      Really? I have an 10-gig IBM that still works as good as it did when i got it 7 years ago. As for floppies, it's pretty accurate.

    3. Re:Why Bother? by jp10558 · · Score: 1

      Wow, I must have good luck. I've only ever had 1 Maxtor HD fail, and that was after 4 years of constant use - not bad for a consumer model really. Also, it didn't "fail" as throw S.M.A.R.T. warnings, so I imaged it, replaced it with a new drive, and put the image there. For all I know, there was nothing really wrong with the drive.

      OTOH, I've overall had good luck with HDs, the other one I had fail (2 total over 10 years of use) was after being out of a PC for 6 months, used as a doorstop being hit by a door multiple times a day. I took it out because it was only 20GB and I had bigger drives at the time, not because of any problems.

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    4. Re:Why Bother? by kesuki · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's why I now use an automated system involving monks and papyrus scrolls for all my data.

      a 2000 year life span for the data if it's properly preserved? phaw, I have a dedicated array of Neanderthals drawing painting in caves. depending on geological stability I demand 35,000+ years of data storage life.

    5. Re:Why Bother? by Luigi30 · · Score: 1

      SMART is garbage. I've had a drive throwing off SMART warnings for 2 years signaling impending doom, but it's still happily chugging away.

      --
      503 Sig Unavailable

      The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
    6. Re:Why Bother? by jp10558 · · Score: 1

      I think so, I believe that drive had been doing the same 2 years before, and I disabled it in the motherboard. This happened when I changed mobo's and didn't disable it in the new one. However, it did let me convince my Uncle to buy me a new 250GB to replace the 60GB that "died".

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    7. Re:Why Bother? by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Too bad those scrolls had lousy ECC.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    8. Re:Why Bother? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      Don't worry! Solid state hard drives appeared already. Now it's just matter of the price dropping. I give it 5 years.

    9. Re:Why Bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I made a little floppy totem (out of the second floppy to fail on the same job. Kept that in a place where the other floppies could see what awaited them if they didnt' successfully store amd retrieve my data at least once. I can't recall another floppy failing after I did that.

    10. Re:Why Bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget Western Digital.

      I've been wonderfully inspired by the chirping death knell of a number of WD drives.

    11. Re:Why Bother? by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      Wait till it finally runs out of spare sectors to map.

      Get a SMART reader and see what it says about your drive - if it's just saying "yeah, this drive is >40000 hours old" ignore.

      If it says "Slow spin-up time", or "exessive ECC corrected errors", back your data up more regularly than you do now.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    12. Re:Why Bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seagate drives now come with a 5 year warranty, in Australia anyway.

    13. Re:Why Bother? by acb · · Score: 1

      How hot did your drives run? Hard drives these days have temperature sensors which can be interrogated with software (under Linux, hddtemp does this). If a drive is kept too hot, its lifespan shortens drastically.

      If this is a persistent problem, you may want to invest in some hard drive coolers. I got one and my hard drive's temperature dropped from >50C to around 30C. The small cooling units consisting of one fan that sits on the bottom of the drive are sufficient to achieve this, and they're cheap.

  12. Old news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been delivering death on demand for years. I gots me the kung-fu grip.

    1. Re:Old news... by Rafikichi · · Score: 1

      You gots you 'da' kung-fu grip.* *In Conan o'Brien's Bill Clinton impersonation voice.

  13. Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Famatra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why destroy when you can simply have everything be encrypted? It's cheaper too, in fact there are some free / open source on the fly encryption programs that can do large partitions:

    Do any of the Linux distributions do encryption, of even full partition/harddrive encryption? That maybe ideal.

    1. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Stonehand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Depends on the threat level.

      If there's an encryption scheme, there's a key. And depending on who's looking for it, they may resort to coercive measures to get that key. Or, for that matter, attempting to get the key and the medium simultaneously -- e.g raiding your place and seizing anything that could provide the key, including you.

      The greater the physical destruction and the lower probability that the data would be recoverable, however, the less productive it becomes for someone to try, and the less likely that even if they DO try that the information will be compromised.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    2. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Jeian · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but in that kind of battle, my money's on Ft. Meade.

    3. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by binarybum · · Score: 2

      A good point - Seagate is working on this on the hardware side:
      http://www.pcworld.com/resource/article/0,aid,1215 22,pg,1,RSS,RSS,00.asp

      Although it isn't nearly as cool as toxic mist spewing out all over the place as conjured by a phone call, it makes a lot more sense and would not bear an annual fee.
      Besides, a HD could be copied 100s of times over before you had a chance to make that phone call. In fact, there are relatively simple workarounds for all lines of defense on these destructive drives - they rely heavily on obscurity.

      --
      ôó
    4. Re: Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Why destroy when you can simply have everything be encrypted?

      These are probably for people who collect kiddie porn, and don't want to go to jail for failing to deliver the password when subpoena'd.

      Also, as others have pointed out, encryption schemes haven't exactly proven to be enduring.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    5. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Why destroy when you can simply have everything be encrypted?

      Yes, but we have tinfoil hats for a purpose. The government has big computers that can break encryption..

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    6. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Linux supports this natively on most distributions - Loop-AES is the preferred system and has very little overhead. Just make sure you encrypt *everything* - i.e. all filesystems and the swap partition - to avoid having any leaks. The encrypted filesystem should also check the signature of the running kernel to make sure it was not tampered with (since obviously the kernel itself cannot be encrypted or the system won't boot).

      Loop-AES even goes so far as to scrub the RAM locations containing the key to avoid burn-in that could be traced later. In this configuration it meets many military grade security standards.

    7. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Loop-AES is the preferred system and has very little overhead.
      I thought devmapper was the preferred method nowadays. S'what I use.
    8. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by svanstrom · · Score: 1
      Why destroy when you can simply have everything be encrypted?

      Funny I'd read about this today, just a cpl of hours ago I added a "shutdown -h now"-button on my cellphone; which, of course, shutsdown my computer, making sure that the encrypted parts of it aren't accessable by anyone.

      The 'phone-computer connection is using bluetooth, so this is basically for if someone's entered my home; whenever I leave my computer it isn't shutdown, but the screensaver kicks in, which is secure enough for most situations.

      I'm using MacOS X, and although filevault (and 'secure virtual memory') might not be what the CIA's using, I'm sure it's secure enough for if my computer is stolen.

      --
      perl -e'print$_{$_} for sort%_=`lynx -dump svanstrom.com/t`'
    9. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Software encryption is slow. Plus it requires a whole PKI infrastructure for large sytem deployments. That can be a nightmare for military operations.

    10. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they rely heavily on obscurity

      I know the particular mindless phrase you were thinking of using there. You bastard.

    11. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

      Any of them... no .... all of them yes.

      --

      I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

    12. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      This is intended for people and organizations who want to keep their data from ominous three-letter organizations. These organizations may have the ability to simply break the encryption.

      (Anecdote: I did a little work at the NSA several years ago. The guy escorting me said that they measure their computing power in acres. As in a acres of computers...lots of horsepower for a brute-force attack. Sorta like taking the 'imagine a beowulf cluster' joke to the extreme)

      For you and me, encryption will be plenty to keep the data safe. For classified data, or keeping data from entities with vast resources, something a little more 'creative' is necessary.

    13. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > Why destroy when you can simply have everything be encrypted?

      I do computer forensics. If we find an encrypted drive it's a bad sign. We'll get a supeona from the judge and let the cops get the decryption keys from the drive owner.

      If we find a drive that has a hardware failure, there isn't much we can do. Unless it's a huge deal (FBI, NSA, etc) nobody is going to open the drive and do a chemical analysis to see if the drive has been melted by death-rays on purpose.

      Of course, once we get to know which manufacturers and models have this feature we will be back in business :-)

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    14. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by toby · · Score: 1
      seizing anything that could provide the key, including you

      Although some people might find it hard to believe, this certainly does happen (via Risks digest).

      --
      you had me at #!
    15. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by omnirealm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Software encryption is slow. Plus it requires a whole PKI infrastructure for large sytem deployments. That can be a nightmare for military operations.

      My cryptographic filesystem addresses this problem:

      http://sourceforge.net/projects/ecryptfs/

      It's got a pluggable PKI interface to facilitate integration into enterprise environments. But if all you need is plain old passphrase-based protection, it provides that too. It has Trusted Platform Module support, and it will soon have GnuPG support.

      It's currently in the "experimental" stage, and will be for the next couple of months (or over the next year, depending on how the Linux kernel community treats it :-), but it implements almost the entire UNIX filesystem semantics at this point and is pretty stable. Anyone who is interested in transparent cryptographic filesystems with strong key management and policy capabilities might want to keep an eye on this. And if you're in the mood for testing and/or contributing patches, please do. :-)

      Other crypto filesystems for Linux that I recommend include dm-crypt (it comes w/ the 2.6 kernel), EncFS, and CFS. Google around.

      That said, this self-destruct hard drive is a pretty good idea in some cases, for reasons stated elsewhere in this thread. It's hard to apply "rubber hose" cryptanalysis on the user when the media itself is irreparably damaged. The real trick is to get this technology ubiquitously deployed, so that the very fact that you are using it does not arouse suspicion. The next trick is to prevent "false positives." Try explaining to a CEO why his critical documents are toast because some $8-an-hour IT intern inadvertently caused his hard drive to disentegrate.

      Should the price tag drop by an order of magnitude and the false positive stats be low enough, I might consider getting one of these drives. Until then, I think that financial markets, military units, and other such high-risk/high-value will find these drives to be a worthy investment. I'm largely concerned with addressing the problem of some random crooks stealing my equipment, so good old fashioned crypto w/ a decent key protection scheme will do well enough for me.

      --
      An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
    16. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by KingPunk · · Score: 0

      well, truth be told, encryption technologies come and go. some have been compromised, some havent..
      it isn't a matter of IF it'll be compromised, but WHEN. ..pretty iffy for a fail-safe situation to me.

      however, i believe this is geared toward the more,
      fail-proof industrial spy type stuff, which happens a lot more than most would think it does.
      (atleast more than what is reported)

      and as for that, its very appropiate.
      -just my 2cents, --KingPunk

    17. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Actually 2 levels work great.

      1 - encrypted filesystem.

      2 - primercord wrapped around the hard drive with a battery operated trigger.

      If the explosion that will cut the drive into pieces and kills the guy trying to take the computer doesn't destroy the data, the encryption will slow them down significantly to the point that when they crack the remaining fragments the data will be of little use.

      I really like the explosives option... but then it makes a computer failure a bit more nervous for the owner.

      finally, I prefer a simpler approach. all "secret" data resides on a USB drive that is never more than a few inches away from me, easily hidden or removed at a moment's notice and easily disposed of / hidden.

      complete and utter fools keep sensitive data on a hard drive INSIDE the machine when the machine is not in a high security location.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Transcendent · · Score: 1

      Insightful?

      Encryption can be cracked... if your hard drive is turned into a pile of goo, I doubt they have some sort of reverse-deterministic machine to reconstruct the magnetic data.

      Even Windows lets you encrypt your hard drive... but encryption can and will be cracked if someone desires it bad enough. Destroying it physically (if you do a good enough job) should be fail safe.

    19. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by mattso · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, the NSA those guys are good.

      1. Had no clue about what weapons and forces Iraq really had.
      2. Still can't find Waldo.
      3. No clue where Bin Laden is.
      4. No idea in advance about 9/11.

      They might have acres of Vic-20's maybe. Sometimes I think they pay people to flood forums and what not talking about their amazing powers. Because the record clearly shows if they actually are good at doing anything it has nothing to do with what everyone claims they are amazing at.

    20. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Depends on the threat level.

      Nope. Well, unless you think the attacker may be able to defeat modern ciphers. If your enemy is that capable, though, just give up now.

      If there's an encryption scheme, there's a key. And depending on who's looking for it, they may resort to coercive measures to get that key.

      This is no different from someone resorting to coercive measures to acquire your non-destroyed hard drive.

      The reason that encrypting the data is better, from a security perspective, is that it's *easier* to destroy the key than it is to destroy all of the data. If you want really high security, use a strong master key that is generated inside a tamper-reactive device which will (a) never give up the key and (b) destroy it instantly if anyone attempts to open the device, or upon command from a cell-phone call, or if an attached GPS receiver either goes away or reports the wrong location... whatever. Any idea you can come up with for triggering the drive to self-destruct you can also use to destroy the key. And the key goes from fully operational to fully zeroed in microseconds, unlike the mist-in-the-drive, which takes time to really wipe all the data.

      Further, with crypto-based security, you can require the presence of multiple keys. For example, you could use a high security FIPS 140-2 level 4 crypto processor like an IBM 4758, which stays inside the computer with the data, plus a key stored in a smart card, plus a (shorter) key that you memorize. If all of the elements are required to successfully decrypt any of the data, then destroying any one of those elements is sufficient to effectively destroy all of the data.

      Not only that, but an IBM 4758 can be had for about $1500, and it'll encrypt data for as many drives as you want. So it's not only more secure, it's cheaper, too.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    21. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but an IBM 4758 can be had for about $1500, and it'll encrypt data for as many drives as you want. So it's not only more secure, it's cheaper, too.

      I should add that if you're truly paranoid, and money is really no object, then you might use a 4758 or similar and then use a self-destructing drive, too. Just in case your enemy can defeat, say, AES-256.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    22. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      Multiple levels would make recovery impossible by any known technology on this planet.

      1. Hardware Level - There are Triple DES controllers now availible which sit between your IDE interface and the drive which transparently encrypt/decrypt everything going to/from the drive. Even the boot sector. Without the USB-like dongle, the drive is useless. Destroy that key and the drive's contents are forever lost.

      2. Bootloader Level - loop-aes and so on are essentially in this category and everything from boot onward is encrypted/decrypted by the code.

      3. Containers - these files can even appear as drives to the file management and you store what you want within. Sort of like a super zip/tar file with super encryption by comparison.

      4. Files - encrypt the individual files you want to protect.

      5. Steganography, etc. - The first part of breaking encryption is knowing it is there. Don't know, can't attack.

      Has anyone got a solid example of a maximum strength PGP file being cracked without compromising the passphrase? Anyone know of two levels of encryption being cracked? What about multiple levels of software with hardware?

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    23. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason that encrypting the data is better, from a security perspective, is that it's *easier* to destroy the key than it is to destroy all of the data.

      It is also easier to recover the key than it is to recover the data. If the key is destroyed, all you have to do is look through 2^256 or however many combinations and see which of them decrypts the drive. If the actual data is destroyed, sure, you can look through all of the 2^(however many billions of bits were stored on the drive) possible combinations, but even if you find one that makes sense, you have no way of knowing whether or not what you have is actually what was originally stored. This isn't to say that crypto isn't useful, but being able to physically destroy the compromised drive is higher security than having an encrypted drive.

    24. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by jimi+the+hippie · · Score: 1

      Who is your enemy? The NSA???

    25. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by plover · · Score: 1
      Well, there was a widely announced attack on PGP discovered a few years back. An attacker covertly attached his public key to someone else's public key (which at that time could be done because the whole key wasn't checksummed and signed -- just the individual public keys.) As I recall, this was placed in the "Official Corporate Backdoor Public Key" position in the key. Then, when you got your recipients key, unless you were keen-eyed you might not notice that his public key was "extra-long". When you sent him a note, you encoded the session key not once but twice -- once to your recipient, and once to the attacker. It was then up to the attacker to intercept the encoded message, but they'd have no problem reading it.

      Was this ever done? I don't remember if anyone ever announced any real-world attacks.

      --
      John
    26. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by aaronl · · Score: 1

      If you encrypt the data, you can be compelled to furnish the key. If you destroy the data, then you cannot produce the data. They can use it against you by trying to show you had something to hide, but without supporting evidence, they can't really convict you on just that. If you refuse to turn over the key, things are worse for you. Then they have the data, but you *are* hiding something.

      At once point when I was in high school, I was paranoid about my parents finding certain content. I'd set up a system that if you didn't do the right things and tried to forcibly mount the drive, it would destroy itself and run a DOD data wipe on it. This was made somewhat easy in that I used Stacker to compress the drive, and so I only had to erase one file. Norton Utilities came with the secure file eraser. Now, this wouldn't do much against a real data forensics person, since they wouldn't just boot the computer and see what happens.

    27. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a trivial attack, known as rubber hose cryptanalysis, that will defeat any modern cypher. Basically, the attacker simply tortures you until you hand over the key. With a hardware system like this, you can just give them the duress key which will trigger the destruction of all data. Your software system won't provide as good security (i.e. pulling the plug when it starts to wipe (deleting is not good enough) the data) as a hardware based system.

    28. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      devmapper has a keying flaw that could result in a known plaintext attack on certain filesystems. This was discovered by Loop-AES maintainer Jari Ruusu and a workaround was implemented in Loop-AES but not devmapper. Hence I'd suggest using Loop-AES until this flaw is fixed.

    29. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Well, he said truly paranoid...

      Lizard men from the planet Vulcan?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    30. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      you have no way of knowing whether or not what you have is actually what was originally stored.

      The beauty is that you just have to convince the judge that you can be sure and you can make up any evidence you'd like.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    31. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      But here in the UK,we have the RIP Act which mandates disclosure of keys to authorities...

      If intercepted communications are encrypted (encoded and made secret), the act will force the individual to surrender the keys (pin numbers which allow users to decipher encoded data), on pain of jail sentences of up to two years

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    32. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      They don'tneed the big computers, most countries now have laws where you are forced to turn over the keys...

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    33. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by eneville · · Score: 0

      The encrypted filesystem seems to be unmaintained and limited to ext2. I think xfs might have some abilities, but generally i think a root encrypted system is a bad idea, just mounting your important stuff manually in /home or /usr is good enough. sensitive material should not be automounted, so its a half descent solution to have the disk mounted in user space.

      I think the USB keys are rising in popularity on the linux scene.

    34. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Make sure noone steals the USB drive. Better would be to combine the USB drive and maybe a few HDs to form the data, each one with a part of the data (only a few bytes per chunk so you can't even make out a sentence in plain ASCII) and encrypted by keys stored on the other devices and a few passwords. Give the USB components to different people.
      Of course that's overkill for most data but if it's something sensitive like codes for accessing military equipment, especially WMDs, it might be necessary.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    35. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If the key is destroyed, all you have to do is look through 2^256 or however many combinations and see which of them decrypts the drive.

      LOL!!!

      You obviously have no idea just how large 2^256 is.

      An interesting analysis of exactly that is found in Bruce Schneier's _Applied Cryptography_. He looked at the problem from a thermodynamic point of view, asking the question: "Assuming a maximally-efficient computer that used a minimum quantity of energy per bit transition, how much power would it take to count from 0 to 2^256?".

      He assumed that the amount of energy required to toggle a single bit is the energy required to move a single electron from one orbit to another. Multiplying that extremely tiny amount of power by 2^256, an extremely enormous number, gives a result so large that, Schneier calculates, it would require the entire output of our sun for approximately two years. And we're talking about the entire output, not just the tiny fraction of it that lands on Earth. Break out your trusy Dyson Sphere

      And that is just to count through the values, to say nothing of the energy required to do a trial decryption with each, and analyze the "decrypted" data to see if the key guessed is the right one. It also ignores the time required to do all of this work.

      Of course, you could argue that reversible computing, a field in its infancy, might be able to cut the power consumption requirements significantly. But using real transistors, not theoretical devices that require the smallest possible unit of power, would increase them significantly.

      I agree with Schneier's conclusion: 256-bit keys won't be brute-forceable until computers are made of something other than matter and occupy something other than space.

      Nope. If a 256-bit key was used, and it's gone, your only hope is to attack the cipher, or weaknesses in the implementation of the encryption protocols, because you're not going to find that key with a brute force search.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    36. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 1

      There is a trivial attack, known as rubber hose cryptanalysis, that will defeat any modern cypher. Basically, the attacker simply tortures you until you hand over the key.

      You didn't read the post you responded to. With a hardware cryptocard, you can't hand over the key because you don't know it. Of course, you would probably configure the card to require authentication via a passphrase before it would decrypt any data, but you could, and would, also configure it to have a duress passphrase that would instruct the card to destroy the key.

      As I said before: Any scheme you can come up with to trigger the destruction of the data can also be used to trigger the destruction of the key, and destroying the key is faster.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    37. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 1

      But here in the UK,we have the RIP Act which mandates disclosure of keys to authorities...

      So what happens if you had set the machine up so that when it was moved or opened the key was automatically deleted, and the police weren't careful enough and triggered the deletion?

      You don't have the key to hand over. You never had the key, actually. It was in the card, and the cops destroyed their own evidence.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    38. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by nasor · · Score: 1

      That's hilarious. You really consider "around your neck" to be a secure location? What if someone just puts a gun in your face and demands the drive? There's a reason why people usually leave valuable things in places like safes, rather than simply carrying them around...

    39. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by m50d · · Score: 1

      How could the filesystem check the kernel? If someone's modified the kernel they could easily get it to report a faulty checksum. The thing to do is keep your kernel on read-only media like a cdr.

      --
      I am trolling
    40. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by m50d · · Score: 1

      Aren't all modern block ciphers resistant to known-plaintext attacks? The flaw as I know it allows you to mount a dictionary attack, but nothing more. There's a simple solution to that - use a strong password.

      --
      I am trolling
    41. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry but if someone put's a gun to your head you'll give thme your GpG keys, your SSN, your Pin number, etc...

      a usb drive gives you flee-ability so you can snatch and run BEFORE they get next to you with a gun.

      only a COMPLETE moron would let them get right net to you .. ever hear of having a escape route and having a clear view of the entrance? these Losers that call themselves "hackers" that know nothing about keeping from getting caught and how to cover yourself are utter jokes. and you just informed me that you are also one of these people I call a joke.

      I suggest you LEARN about peersonal security, hiding in plain sight, and fleeing and evasion as you obviousally know nothing about the subject.

      Cripes. I can work on my stuff at ANY pc, including your personal one and I GUARENTEE that you will find no evidence of anything I was doing or even that I was even there. and only rank amateurs would disagree with this cince they know nothing about how to go about it.

    42. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If all of the elements are required to successfully decrypt any of the data, then destroying any one of those elements is sufficient to effectively destroy all of the data.

      Hold on there kids. The key to all encyrpted data is the language it was written in. It is possible to decipher ANY encrypted text WITHOUT knowing the keys. It may take a massive compute farm and a couple of months, but it's do-able.

      If you are worried about the kid next door getting your porn, then encyption is probably okay. If, on the other hand, you need to keep your data secure from some "government agency", then phyiscally destroying the data is the only option that you have.

    43. Re:Software Encryption (or Destruction) Instead? by swillden · · Score: 1

      It is possible to decipher ANY encrypted text WITHOUT knowing the keys.

      Maybe. Depends on if you have a good way to recognize the plaintext. Assuming the encryption was not done with a one-time pad.

      It may take a massive compute farm and a couple of months, but it's do-able.

      Try all the computers on the planet and a few centuries for, say 128-bit keys. That may be an optimistic estimate. For 256-bit keys, unless there's a weakness in the cipher, it's basically impossible.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  14. Great Business Model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    This is a great idea! I'd pay for such a service, as I am sure will many others. Now if only they could offer end to end management of things like self-desructing offisite backups.

    I'd like to see them fire me then!

    "I'm fired. Oh really?" - presses speed dial 1 on cellphone.

    "There go the production servers hard drives. Lets discuss my retirement package quickly. Maybe we won't lose all the offsite backups."

  15. Aaaargh! What happen???-Patent Poop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing you didn't take out a patent on it.

  16. Mission Impossible by M3rk1n_Muffl3y · · Score: 1

    A must have accessory for those "this message will self-destruct in 5 seconds" moments.

    --
    This is not the sig you are looking for...
  17. Main screen turn on by The+Angry+Artist · · Score: 1

    This brings a whole new meaning to Someone set us up the bomb.

    --
    If you're reading this, stop it.
    1. Re:Main screen turn on by Kyojin · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't that be "Blue Screen turn on"?

  18. The first user of this technology... by Embedded+Geek · · Score: 1
    --

    "Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."

    1. Re:The first user of this technology... by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      Let's be honest, this isn't for the security admin. This is for piracy/crackers and kiddie porn collectors/producers. My favorite story is the young man who put (BIG) magnets in his door frame so as the computer was carried out the data disappeared. Of course that was in the 1980's...

  19. And when they decide to raise prices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your hard drive will be held hostage...

  20. Saw this years ago by mpontes · · Score: 1
    I saw something like this years ago on a magazine. Some project called "E.T. Phones home". A guy had the hard drive of his desktop inside the microwave, then somehow hooked the microwave to a phone to make it start when he called home.

    A terrible waste of a microwave and a waste of space, since you'd need to have the microwave just next to your PC box, though...

    --
    Bored? Browse Slashdot with a +6 modifier for Troll comme
  21. Damn telemarketers! by Piranhaa · · Score: 1

    Configurable triggers such as removal or tampering of the drive, removal of device from a resting GPS point, cellular telephone call, or even a change in temperature will release a "chemical mist" into the drive (not the computer) destroying it layer by layer.

    I can see a new aim for telemarketers... "How many hard drives can we destroy this year??"

    1. Re:Damn telemarketers! by idonthack · · Score: 1

      I can see a new aim for telemarketers... "How many hard drives can we destroy this year??"

      It probably uses a special tone as a signal, so when it gets a random call nothing happens.

      Or maybe they're just on the "do not call" list.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
  22. Has struck my mind before by wooby · · Score: 1

    I've wondered sometimes about the best way to quickly destroy a hard disk. It's difficult to come up with a relatively safe way to go about it. My best idea was a thermite insert that stood between the cover plate and the platter, and stock drives could be modified. This is also horribly dangerous. The idea in the article is much better and safer.

    1. Re:Has struck my mind before by villageidiot357 · · Score: 1

      How terribly dangerous would thermite be? Aluminum and rust aren't going to do anything by themselves. You just have to worry about whatever you are using to set the thermite off going off prematurely. Even then you are not risking an explosion. Just a fire. Of course depending on what was compromised a fire might be usful afterall.

    2. Re:Has struck my mind before by __aagctu1952 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Thermite is how I would go about it as well. However, I believe it can be done safely - you just have to
      • 1) Use a minimal amount of thermite.
      • 2) Properly isolate the booby-trapped drive.

      1) would just require a bit of experimentation on old dead drives. I believe you can get away with using fairly little thermite (although some overkill doesn't hurt) - you don't have to melt the entire hard drive, casing and all, you just have to scorch the platters beyond recovery.
      2) should also be quite doable - since we're not talking excessive amounts of thermite here, I think a 5 1/4"-sized ceramic mount/casing for a regular 3 1/2" drive would work. It just has to be isolated enough to make sure the rest of the computer doesn't burst into flames and burn the house down.

      'course, using an external drive would make it even easier...

      Anyone up for a summer electronics/pyrotechnics project? :)
    3. Re:Has struck my mind before by Zenki · · Score: 1

      Wrap the drive entirely in primacord. When the primacord goes off, it'll crush the drive.

    4. Re:Has struck my mind before by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      a large model rocket engine strapped to the drive should work, but i wouldn't trust it without testing it to ensure it could burn through thr drive well enough

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    5. Re:Has struck my mind before by plover · · Score: 1
      I've been told that the U.S. Army has "shoot here to destroy computer" stickers on their communications and cryptographic equipment, and that one of the things they're trained on is "what to destroy if the equipment is about to fall into enemy hands" and "how to destroy it".

      I suspect it's actually a much easier problem to solve when your users' day jobs involve munitions.

      --
      John
    6. Re:Has struck my mind before by wooby · · Score: 1

      I've never seen your "shoot here" stickers, but I've worked with a US Army Special Forces team and one of their first orders of business was to consolidate the communications/crypto gear and rig it up with demolitions in the headquarters. Also rigged to explode on a moments notice were maps and extra ammunition.

  23. Can't wait... by twigles · · Score: 1

    Can't wait to see them get some targeted worm that jacks up a group of hard drives. Security guy --short on trust. It's a requirement for the job.

    1. Re:Can't wait... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Funny

      Forget a virus or worm.

      Imagine the scene if you will.

      RING RING RING RING
      Click
      "Hello, this is john from [company] we are calling to confirm you have won the prize draw you entered..."
      (sound of mist being deployed in the background)

      Much more malicious, and also much greater chance of it occuring.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  24. Yearly Fee... by Ismilar · · Score: 5, Funny

    "plus a yearly fee." ... which you WILL pay... or else you will get to see our drive-destroying technology in action!

    1. Re:Yearly Fee... by the_other_one · · Score: 1

      You seem to have missed paying your yearly fee.
      Security forces will be arriving in five minutes.
      Would you be intersted in our $10000.00 quick reinstatement package.

      --
      134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
    2. Re:Yearly Fee... by orkysoft · · Score: 2

      Actually, our yearly fee is another security feature. If you don't pay, we'll assume you've been captured by the black helicopters, and you'd want your disks destroyed.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    3. Re:Yearly Fee... by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      Okay, imagine there are quotes around that...

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
  25. Hmmm... by Famatra · · Score: 4, Informative

    All I see there, on not4chan.org, are drawings. In some areas they are illegal I'm sure (along with 'regular' pornography too). However - at least in the United States - drawings are deemed legal since no person was harmed in the process.

    Pretty good principle, if an action or behaviour by a person harms no one (or only the person themself) then it should be allowed. I'd call it the harm principle I'd call it the harm principle or maybe negative liberty :).

    1. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Pretty good principle, if an action or behaviour by a person harms no one (or only the person themself) then it should be allowed.

      I agree. Personally, I don't see why the mere possession of child pornography is such a serious crime. If all you did was download it (and didn't pay for it, of course), you're not a party to child abuse. Hell, being sexually attracted to adolescents (>13 or so) is not abnormal, it's biology.

      True pedophilia should be treated as the psychological disorder that it is. Locking up people that haven't harmed anyone is generally a bad idea. People who genuinely are child abusers should be shot.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The argument to that would be that since a child would have been involved in the creation of a pornograhpic image (excluding those created in photoshop or as a drawing), those who download child pornography are creating a market in which there is a potential for children to be abused.

      The people invovled would in essence be a contributing factor to the creation of child porn. While not not directly responsible, there is a potential for a bit of indirect responsiblity.

      Then you get into the question as to where the pornography came from and weither or not it was payed for, further establishing work for an overworked police force.

    3. Re:Hmmm... by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      You mean like with drug use?

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    4. Re:Hmmm... by sPaKr · · Score: 1

      The "Market" claim is tricky. For there really to be a market one needs to trade something for something else. If you trade the item for cash thats a market. If you trade the item for access (a copy) of another item again market. But if you gain access for nothing is that really a market? While I dont agree with the content I belive you need more then just access to the material for a market to be created. Oddly this is similar to piracy. Is it possible to pirate without theft. If you have $0, and you recieve a copy of msoffice for free you coped it (piracy). But had you not recieved it for free you wouldn't be able to afford it, thus the sale was never possible and theft didn't occur. For piracy to be theft you must replace the act of sale with the act of a priacy, but if a sale is impossible piracy can still happen and no one be at a lost. So when you have only producers and only consumers where the consumers give nothing back to the producers you dont have a market, you have leachs. Taking this to the digial domain where more consumers put no more or less load on a producer then one really wonders if piracy is hurting anyone.

    5. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, exactly. If someone grows pot in their own back yard and smokes it, who are they hurting?

    6. Re:Hmmm... by westlake · · Score: 1
      If all you did was download it (and didn't pay for it, of course), you're not a party to child abuse

      I rob a bank and give you a third of the take, money which you know was stolen, a guard was shot and you know this too. You have accepted the fruits of a crime, you are concealing evidence of a crime, and you are now a party to the crime.

      I rape a child and give you a copy of the video, explicitly for your private sexual entertainment. It is brutal and violent past all description. There is no way on god's green earth it can be mistaken for conseual sex among adults.

      Tell me then, what is different? Why should anyone consider you an innocent?

    7. Re:Hmmm... by unitron · · Score: 1

      By possessing it you share in the invasion of privacy that occurred when the pictures were taken. This applies to any pictures of any unwilling participants of any age.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    8. Re:Hmmm... by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 2, Informative

      not4chan.org == "drawn" kiddie porn, you sick fuck.

      --
      ymmv
    9. Re:Hmmm... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      To some people the knowledge that others enjoy their goods is reward enough.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      being sexually attracted to adolescents (>13 or so)

      Being sexually attracted to 6 or 8 year olds is not a crime. Acting on those attractions is.

    11. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in the netherlands children can legally become pornography models, and be paid for such work, and be harmed no more than any child actor is..

      Not that I'm disagreeing with you I'm just pointing out that if the problem is 'causing harm' to children, then regulated _real_ child porn is not any more harmful. what is harrmful are people breaking the law to create child porn, because they don't care about the child or anything, because they've already commited a felony that can carry a 30 year+ sentance, and can leave them tagged for life and unable to find work..

      so hell, if you're gonna break that many laws you might as well get a life sentace for killing the kid, so that you at least have a roof over your head for the rest of your days if you're ever caught....

    12. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in the acse where a the 15YO girl took nude pictures of herself and distributed them, you would have no problem with people possessing them, because her privacy was not invaded (since she took the pictures herself)?

      What about pictures of kids on a nude beach, if the pictures were taken with the parent's permission?

    13. Re:Hmmm... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      I'll tell you a secret. What they are doing in porn videos, does not hurt a bit.

    14. Re:Hmmm... by ring-eldest · · Score: 1

      I rob a bank and give you a third of the take, [...] and you are now a party to the crime.

      Why don't you use an analogy that actually fits this situation? Something along the lines of videotaping a bank robbery and then distributing that to your friends. Let's see you back up the claim that possession of a video tape of a bank robbery deserves serious jail time.

    15. Re:Hmmm... by unitron · · Score: 1
      Anyone underage is legally considered not competent to make the decision. That's why it doesn't matter how consenting a minor is (or one deludes oneself into thinking that they are), intercourse with them is still statutory rape.

      As for the kids on the beach, their parents are considered, by default, legally competent to make such decisions on behalf of their children. Doesn't necessarily mean they are actually right (or wrong), and there are probably all sorts of jurisdictionally dependent exceptions and confusions.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  26. Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Why exactly would someone spend $2000 on self-destructive hardware when they can just encrypt the entire drive at the block level to begin with? It makes the data on the drive worthless to thieves, yet doesn't cost anything.

    We do this all the time with our Linux laptops using loop-AES and a password and/or USB key before mounting the drive. Since unencrypted data never touches the disk itself, it can just be discarded or reused with a simple zero wipe.

    Besides, the self destructive approach would never be acceptable in a military or top secret installation - certifiably strong full-disk encryption (not just a BIOS or hard disk based password) is mandated here anyway.

    Apparently this is intended for Windows users who don't have the fully-encrypted-drive option.

    1. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      Well that would be too easy. Store the encryption key on a flash drive or floppy and you just have to destroy the key media. It wouldn't help to beat the password out of you. The trick here is how to manage backup copies of the key. Having only one copy of the key on fragile media like floppies doesn't work.

    2. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Chazman · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Besides, the self destructive approach would never be acceptable in a military or top secret installation

      Not as a primary means of data protection, but they love it as a secondary means. They'd buy these drives *AND* run encrypted filesystems on them. Remember the spy plane that was forced to land in China? When the Chinese military stormed the plane, the comms op was hacking the crypto equipment to bits -- literally, with a large axe. Official recommended procedure, after going through the electronic sterilization steps. Execute all designed-in electronic destruction measures, then follow up with as many physical destruction measures as you have time for.

      --
      -----Chaz
    3. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently this is intended for Windows users who don't have the fully-encrypted-drive option.

      Or for drug dealers not smart enough to encrypt or not willing to take any chances.

    4. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As others have noted, fellow AC, encryption is useless if whoever snags your hard drive also snags you with an intention to re-enact that scene with Mr. Blonde from "Reservoir Dogs".

      And it's not like you can lie your way out of that. "The password is '12345'." "Not only is that the sort of password an idiot would have on his luggage, it's not the password. I guess your balls have to spend a little more time with Mr. Taser."

    5. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are these procedures documented on the web? Got a url?

    6. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      have it stored on a suitably stable WORM, so long as the chip and it's housing are safe it won't degrade on it's own.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand the point of this. When the enemy raids your installation, they will do so while the computers are on and the key has been entered. Your encryption is useless.

      With this new technology however, the hard drives automatically destroy themselves and at best your enemy gets what they can beat out of you.

      dom

    8. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From what I've been told, all military drives have platters made of glass sub strate. As such, they shatter when explosives inside the casing discharging. All it takes is a command and you get an instant maraca for a musical instrument.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    9. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by asavage · · Score: 1
      This isn't the documentation but it is an article about the event:
      http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/12/10633417 68814.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true

      It mentions they did more then they were required to.

    10. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you have no clue. The U-2 may have been a spy plane, but anyone can tell you that the EP-3 is just a maritime patrol aircraft. Besides, it's over 40 years old. If it was a secret spy plane, I don't think you'd be able to google so much information on the subject.

    11. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Obviously you have no clue. The U-2 may have been a spy plane, but anyone can tell you that the EP-3 is just a maritime patrol aircraft [defenselink.mil]. Besides, it's over 40 years old. If it was a secret spy plane, I don't think you'd be able to google so much information on the subject.

      Don't you just love it when an AC without a clue says someonelse needs one?

      The EP-3 is the elextronic surveillence version of the P-3 (the US's land based MPA). It is used to intercept ellectonic transmissions (amongst other things) for analysis by the US. While it is overt (it's hard to hide an EP-3 flying over international waters), so is the U-2 (although the U-2 flies high so it's a lot harder to intercept). If you limit spying to covert operations, then it may not be spying but it still was (probably) on on intel mission (or else we would have sent a regular P-3) and not the much rarer EP-3.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    12. Re:Why not just encrypt the drive? by iridiumz0r · · Score: 1

      This article requires me to register. Any chance of providing a link which doesn't, or emailing me the contents? I don't want to register for one article.

      Cheers.

  27. $1.99 by coldeeze · · Score: 0

    ...

  28. If you don't pay the yearly fee... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    ... the mist is released. :-)

  29. Similar Technology by Blackeagle_Falcon · · Score: 1

    Sounds a lot like James Bond's burglar proof car.

  30. Ah, the good ole days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Reminds me of the early 90's when I first got access to a pirate BBS. I was so concerned that they would get busted and I'd get raided that I set up a script that would blow away my entire hard drive with one click.

    The stage is set.

    So, a month after I get access I'm hanging out on the BBS at about 11pm and there's a knock at my door. I look through the window and see a police officer. I run the script and answer the door with as much composure as I can muster.

    The police officer looks at me strangely like he was expecting me to react in some way. He then asked if I called. When I said no, he realized that he was at the wrong apartment.

    1. Re:Ah, the good ole days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... Out of all the people that read Slashdot, I'm going to say that this reader is in the minority as far as paranoia: Probably only 1 out of 100000 readers went to these lengths to protect his alleged incognizance of the data on his hard drive. To guestimate further, I would say that the chance that this guy was accidentally visited by police officer during his two year stint as a paranoid freak (or was it longer?) is about 1%. And that is about as wild as a guess can get. If these numbers are ballpark, then you are saying that you are the one person out of around 10 million that had this happen to them. I guess it's possible, but damn, you should have made up something more interesting.

    2. Re:Ah, the good ole days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting argument but unfortunately your "math" is total BS.

      Get real, 1 out of 100000 slashdot readers being that paranoid?

      I'd say that the more accurate figure would be around 1 out of 1000 or even less.

      This is slashdot after all, and I also used to have such a system when I was a kid.

      And I have hard time accepting that I would have been that special :)

  31. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know about you but my computer is under my desk, very close to my testicles. Some script-kiddie would be able to trigger it with a bad ICMP packet and I doubt I would like it.

  32. GPS is baaaad idea! by dindi · · Score: 4, Funny

    I imagine myself walking with a GPS Jammer around data centers like a little kid imagining how many drives I just blew away ....

    1. Re:GPS is baaaad idea! by Rigor+Morty · · Score: 1

      Seriously, imagine the fun I'd have 'accidentally' re-broadcasting a fake gps signal in a region of these, over and over and over and over...

      The cellular phone thing is almost workable, but gps, give me a break.

      --
      Remove the spamfreak to speak.
    2. Re:GPS is baaaad idea! by dindi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      not mentioning the technical questions:
      how will the hard drive see a GPS signal sitting in a HDD case, in a rack, in a room, in a building.

      My garmin starts to bitch if I am under a tree and hey I am almost on the equator with 10+ satellites showing full reception .....

      Actually it happened that with a clear view of the sky I just happened to be in the middle of the Atlantic ocean - well according to my gps.

      No radio tower/cellphone station or any well seen human cause interference ... I was in the jungle walking my dogs and my wife and recording custom routes for fun.

      My point is: if it happens to a trusted brand and quality but admittably a consumer device, it could happen by accident to any device.

    3. Re:GPS is baaaad idea! by nizo · · Score: 1

      It seems to me like a better solution would be some kind of proximity sensor (maybe a few, for redundancy) hidden in a wall/floor/ceiling. If they get out of range, *poof*.

    4. Re:GPS is baaaad idea! by pongo000 · · Score: 1

      There's no need for GPS when you have an internally-accessible geoposition system available.

    5. Re:GPS is baaaad idea! by modecx · · Score: 1

      ...Quite alot like the giant electromagnet in the door from Cryptonomicon. Except it just wiped the drive and blew the electronics by it simply being a huge-ass electro magnet-EMP type thing..

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  33. Wow. by Matilda+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't a bad idea, but I imagine it's going to be a windfall for any child pornographers. How are you going to put them away if the hard drive's a bubbling mass of goop (or just...not readable. But they should use bubbling-goop chemicals just to make it more interesting).

    Of course, I can just see it going in the PGP direction: "He felt the need to buy a $9K hard drive to protect his stuff! He MUST have had something to hide! Guilty!"

    --
    Tluin natha Linux xxizzuss uriu olt bwael mon'tun.
  34. How stupid is that? by lheal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For every N drives they sell, I would put at N the number of people who at some point say,

    "Ooops -- oh, crap."

    Is Murphy's Law just not taught any more?

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
    1. Re:How stupid is that? by pegasustonans · · Score: 1

      Seriously, just spend the money on getting more storage instead of using this ridiculous set-up. Any money left over can then be used to buy a GLOCK 17, which is a much more satisfying emergency drive-destruction device.

      --
      And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
    2. Re:How stupid is that? by Dharma's+Dad · · Score: 1
      Is Murphy's Law just not taught any more?

      Yes, but the law itself precludes anyone from learning from it....

  35. Re:A day late and a dollar short... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had this idea about 20 years back about how compact disks would beat the crap out of tape drives if they'd use them on computers...no patent here either. :)

  36. would homo habalis be proud? by pcxmac · · Score: 1

    probably not, he would think the hammer is a much more cost effective solution. atleast thats what would have happend to me if i ever ended up in such a situation.

    1. Re:would homo habalis be proud? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, 10 minutes in a microwave is a lot more effective. Hitting it with a hammer just breaks the platters (if that), extreme heat actually wipes the data.

    2. Re:would homo habalis be proud? by pcxmac · · Score: 1

      sometimes in the field, when the shit hits the fan, you only have a few minutes before charlie starts lighting u up, before that happens, i doubt anyone has the time to ask mod to heat up the microwave. :)

  37. My datacenter door is a HUGE magnet. by F34nor · · Score: 1

    Um. Yo. Thank N.S.

    Yeah I have a data center like I have no plaurized this idea from the Cryptonomicon

    1. Re:My datacenter door is a HUGE magnet. by idonthack · · Score: 1

      No, in the Cryptonomicon they just put magnets in the doorframe.

      There was someone else who did that, too, in real life.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    2. Re:My datacenter door is a HUGE magnet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, but did it work?

    3. Re:My datacenter door is a HUGE magnet. by Tablizer · · Score: 1
  38. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aruba? I thought people fleeing liability suits went to the Christmas Islands.

  39. Using obvious tricks for free. by nolife · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can not directly relate this to a HD so this is probably somewhat off topic..
    I created some user induced destructing car stereo amplifiers.
    I removed the painted on "Pos(+)" and "Neg(-)" markings from the power terminals and painted new labels on them that were backwards. I also used a black wire for the positive wire and a red for the negative. I used stencils from some old electronic hobby kits I had laying around and they matched perfectly. Jump ahead about 5 years and sure enough, those amplifiers were stolen as well. I can only hope that the person that attempted to hook them up the first time fried them in the process. Yes, I had some free time on my hands back then but I was so frustrated when my stereo was taken the first time that the relabeling the replacement equipment did not seem like a such a waste of time. The fact that there is a good chance this equipment will be ruined does make me feel a little bit better.

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    1. Re:Using obvious tricks for free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry to dissapoint you but this "Death Amp" woudn't hurt the speakers. Next time buy Krell, they really make "Death Amps".

    2. Re:Using obvious tricks for free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he wasn't trying to kill the thief's speakers, only the stolen amp.

  40. Obligatory TSS comment by Pheonix5000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know, I heard Thermite was very effective in the trials. ;)

  41. What if we used the solar by Man+in+Spandex · · Score: 1
  42. The tables are turned... by BlackMesaLabs · · Score: 0

    In soviet russia, hard drive destroys YOU!

  43. too late for WORLDCOM by hilaryduff · · Score: 1

    but im sure there are plenty of new customers

    1. Re:too late for WORLDCOM by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      or Enron or Microsoft or ... well, I foresee a bright future for this technology.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  44. Electromagnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read a story years ago about a bookie joint that got raided by the police. The bookies had a large electromagnet rigged next to the hard drive, with a switch for it outside the computer case. The bookies had activated the electromagnet as soon as the raid started. The hard drive was wiped completely clean and the police had to drop their case for lack of evidence.

  45. no fee for 'dead on demand' by yincrash · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think the author entangled his drive ideas.

    from TFA -
    "The drives will be available "early next year" for between $2,500 to $9,000 each."

    the yearly fee is only the for the other solutions that are already available like -
    "Other solutions exist to delete data or lock the computer if a user enters too many failed passwords or does not login at all over a specified length of time -- Beachhead Solutions will sell you their offering for $129 a year per computer."

    To summarize, the new drives aren't on a yearly fee, only the other offerings mentioned that are already on the market.

  46. Excellent by typedef · · Score: 1

    now no one shall discover my magical girl pretty sammy hentai collection

    1. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, you mean that was your collection I found on usenet yesterday? Excellent.

  47. Too good by dg41 · · Score: 1

    What, are you people too good to use an old fashioned hammer nowadays?

  48. Crime support? by Oldest+European · · Score: 1

    Who besides criminals would have a real use for this?

    Why not simply make sure nobody gets physical access to your HDD?

    And what if an intruder simply copies all the data instead of stealing the HDD?

    And what about your backups?

    1. Re:Crime support? by m50d · · Score: 1

      Laptops for companies who do anything sensitive, or anything with big money in it. If someone's designing a new part for a military weapon system, or a new drug, or a new processor, I can see them wanting a lot of data security.

      --
      I am trolling
  49. The hundred ways to destroy a hard drive thread by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I've wondered sometimes about the best way to quickly destroy a hard disk ... a thermite insert that stood between the cover plate and the platter
    Many of us think the same - nothing like powdered aluminium and iron with a bit of heat to turn a drive into molten metal - of course molten metal tends to do horrible things to everything around it.

    Explosives - an intensive enough shock wave through the platter is going to have the same effect as raising the metal above the curie temperature - all magnetic info will be gone, in addition to portions of the drive getting propelled through the wall.

    Heat - warm it up beyond the curie temperature, will probably also melt and burn any nearby plastic. As a bonus smoke will make it hard to get data from any drives not protected by this feature.

    Really big electromagnets - it's hard to be sure you've removed all trace of magnetic information with a magnet, so go one step furthur and use those electromagnets as an induction furnace - melt that drive!

    Hit it really hard - a shock wave through the material can change the phase and wipe out all that information, so something with a decent surface area moving around the speed of sound will probably do it.

    At this point some form of chemical attack seems to make a lot more sense, since it can be compact and probably won't cause the building to burn to the ground.

    1. Re:The hundred ways to destroy a hard drive thread by SWTP_OS9 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      PLOW: Yep the old form of dragging the heads across the media. Simulating a Vinyl records with a stylus. Works every time!

  50. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, C4 is no good at all ... too destructive and if you actually kill someone in your effort to destroy your hard disk a murder charge will probably it all seem pointless.

    No, I recommend a concealed thermite charge. Turn the drive into a hissing, glowing, molten mass in the bottom of the enclosure. Of course, it would be a good idea to line the case with asbestos or something similar.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  51. Simple... by joshjoneswas · · Score: 1

    Make your own! Terrorists do it all the time! GPS, Cell phone calls... seems easy enough.

  52. What happens if you don't pay the yealy fee by Lour · · Score: 1

    What happens if you don't pay the yealy fee?
    Do they make the magic call that destroys the drive?

    --
    -Lord Shadow
  53. Holy Shizza!! by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is getting serious about this licensing thing. "Refuse to pay us an annual fee and we will destory your computer!" Installing Linux won't help!

    --

    I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

    1. Re:Holy Shizza!! by SWTP_OS9 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft? They would love it!

      Try the MPAA and RIAA! When detected unlicence info being copies or single copy being copy it frys both media.

      Why chemical? Just drop simple sand inside. At 7200 it would litterly sand blast the disk!

  54. my spouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . .removal of **** from a resting GPS point, cellular telephone call, or even a change in temperature will release a chemical mist into the drive (not the computer) destroying it layer by layer.

    ummm. . .can i get one of these fitted to my spouse?

  55. hackaday project by keyrat+rafa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For much less and zero maintenance fees you could just buy a big magnet and put it on top of your hard drive. Then have a missile style toggle switch with a red cover on your case to turn the magnet on. If really adventurous, you could tie the switch to a phone line. There would be no software involved and you'd probably save about $1.7k.

    It'd be much cooler too.

    1. Re:hackaday project by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      probably no good, the magnetic shielding on modern hard drives is very good, rigging up a shotgun shell or other explosive or percussive device would be far more effective.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  56. You Know Who's Gonna Use That First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pedophiles, of course. Great.

  57. Wasting money and valuable data. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Configurable triggers such as removal or tampering of the drive, removal of device from a resting GPS point, cellular telephone call, or even a change in temperature

    Change of temperature of the drive: Ok Smart one. You power down the system to do some maintenance poof there goes your drive. Or Your AC dies, Or you get a new cooler AC in. Or you do some unusual heavy processing. That is a wast.

    removal of the device from a resting GPS point: Doesn't GPS need line of site. I know when I am driving my cars GPS will not work if there are to many trees overhead. Opps a war just started, in canada. GWB first order turn off a civilian GPS so we can have a greater tactical advantage.

    Cell Telephone Call. I can see it someone one has the number and code in their host list and acidently hit the button. Poof. Also hacker with a war dialer.

    Removal or Tampering: The system needs to be fixed (because your second mirror self destructing drive died) Well lets take out the drive... Opps wrong one. Poof!

    This technology can lead to to much stupid mistakes. Issues such as high levels of encryption. Putting the system in a secure computer room with a heavy door and lock. and keep it locked. Good security and IT policies in place.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. Temperature: This would probably be regulated to the system tempurature, and would be set on a difference of more than a degree. This would also be for systems that don't get powered down to "do some maintenance," because that is insecure. They would also be in tempurature-regulated rooms where a disturbance in said tempurature would mean that a hostile is in the room.
      2. removal from GPS: This would only work in a situation where there was a line of sight, so only those that had such a line would set this precaution. These devices would probably be bought by the military, who would put them on the military GPS network, so they would be unaffected in your scenario, but as an aside, if someone were to turn off all the civilian GPS sattelites, I think we'd have a bigger problem on our hands than a few wiped drives.
      3. This would probably require sending specific data over the line, possibly even a challenge/respond method using something like a smartcard. Making this able to happen as a one-step, automatic process would be idiocy.
      4. Again, these drives would be used in situations where this is not a concern. The system does not get "fixed", a new one is purchased. It's where the phrase "military spending" comes from.
      This technology is for people who, because of their training, avoid such mistakes. Encryption and physical security would serve as primary defences, while this would be more of a last resort.
    2. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      Putting the system in a secure computer room with a heavy door and lock.

      Really, what else do you need? In commercial applications companies can afford to lock up systems thus making this pointless. I assume this is really geared towards home "hobbiest" types. And by hobbiests I mean those partaking in illegal activities.

      Physical security is just as important, and let me point out that data loss prevention is yet another form of security. This is a silly idea, and will only be bought by those who think it's 'kewl' and have money to burn. Of course, my question is: do they *give* you a new drive when the last one dies?

    3. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Good IT policies"? This isn't for your average company with a bit of sensitive data. This is for people who fear something like a government raid, and your "secure computer room with a heavy door and lock" isn't going to do jack shit once the feds arrive.

    4. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by skasingularity · · Score: 1

      I'm just gonna assume anyone spending a good bit of money on data secure enough to be physically destroyed if compromised isn't gonna be the kind of person to make an "oops." Just maybe.

    5. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by HermanAB · · Score: 1

      The temperature trigger is required to prevent an attacker from freezing the device in liquid nitrogen to disable the protection system and then disassembling it. It has nothing to do with system temperature - it is a rather extreme thing done in some military black equipment.

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
    6. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Putting the system in a secure computer room with a heavy door and lock.

      Really, what else do you need? In commercial applications companies can afford to lock up systems thus making this pointless. I assume this is really geared towards home "hobbiest" types. And by hobbiests I mean those partaking in illegal activities.

      Physical security is just as important, and let me point out that data loss prevention is yet another form of security. This is a silly idea, and will only be bought by those who think it's 'kewl' and have money to burn. Of course, my question is: do they *give* you a new drive when the last one dies?


      As a number of people have pointed out, government agencies and the military are more likely purchasers, since this technology would ensure destruction of the data.

      Physical security is important, but:

      1. You still have to worry about the inside job, so this would act as a last line of defense from someone trying to steal information. It's really not that different from putting epoxy in USB ports to prevent thumb drives from being used or disabling the ability for speaker phones to act as a microphone.

      2.In some cases, quick destruction is vital, such as when a facility is in danger of being overun. Using such drives in field equipment would mean the equipment is useless if it falls into enemy hands. Pulling from a machine and then taking apart a disk drive so you can completely destroy the platters is time consuming even in a normal situation, I'd hate to have to rely on it for really sensitive information is in danger of imminent capture.

      Sure there is the risk of accidental activation - that's why you have remote backups as well as weigh the risk vs the danger of the information being compromised.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    7. Re:Wasting money and valuable data. by Stauf · · Score: 1

      I think the obvious answer to this is that if you don't see the point of the device, or if you think it's a waste - you're not in the target market.

  58. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by stinerman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Apparently the new way to karma whore is to not use the preview button. ;-)

  59. Data protection... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    Really, doesn't anyone backup their drive anymore?
    And what about these backups?

    Or is that what teh annual fee is for... providing online backup service....?

    Ok so someone steals your drive and gives it to those you do not want to have it.... that is solved here by what..... you giving your data to those you don't want to have it?

  60. you can do the same thing alot cheaper.... by cryptocom · · Score: 1
    --
    It takes just a moment and an action to destroy. It takes some time and thought to create.
  61. might be handy by handy_vandal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not simply make sure nobody gets physical access to your HDD?

    Maybe I'm served with a subpoena requiring me to give the drive to the FBI or whoever. Or maybe it's my data, but the drive is sitting in a colocation slot -- Federal Marshalls swoop down on the ISP, seize the drive.

    Might be handy if the drive self-destructed ....

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
    1. Re:might be handy by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      What? And you DON'T have a backup?

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  62. I think the 1999 Ig Nobel Peace Prize winners... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    ...could design something much better. Like a HDD that shoots out flames to burn any would be tamperer to a crisp.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  63. Those famous dead sea scrolls lasted how long? by ndansmith · · Score: 1

    Almost 2,000 years. But they were stored in an arid climate. Almost all extant documents from that time period are from Alexandria Egypt or the deserts of Palestine. So make sure you have your monks store those in a nice dry place.

    1. Re:Those famous dead sea scrolls lasted how long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it just didn't happen that those places were centers of civilisations that also had a good history of writing everything down--and plenty of scribes to do it?

      Uhuh..

    2. Re:Those famous dead sea scrolls lasted how long? by Elegast · · Score: 1

      Not really, Egypt and Palestine were just backwaters compared to Greece and Rome around that time period.

  64. cue the music... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does the drive play the mission impossible theme while it's being accessed?

  65. Make your own. by nrlightfoot · · Score: 2, Informative

    I suggest making your own with a layer of thermite on top of the drive. I wouldn't trust a chemical mist to destroy data to the point where it couldn't be read with a SQUID device, I want to see my hard drive melt! Plus if they charge $9000, you'd be hardpressed to build a computer expensive enough where it would cost more than if the whole thing was toasted.

    --
    what sig?
  66. Well sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    But since the child pornography problem is routinely overstated, this wouldn't be a problem.

    Yes, its overstated, because child pornography is the most common excuse used for violating our civil rights.

    "We can't allow [insert something the cops fear here] because it will only aid child pornographers. Thank heavens for 9/11 and terrorists; it allows the cops and politicians to work another cliche for a decade or two.

    1. Re:Well sure by plover · · Score: 3, Informative

      And here is an example of the court applying exactly that pressure.

      --
      John
  67. Clipper Chip by Rich+Klein · · Score: 1

    How's the government going to implement a clipper chip in these drives? I'd expect the US government to block this technology because terrorists might use the drives.

    --
    -Rich
  68. Senator Hatch will be delighted by Metasquares · · Score: 1

    We should get one of these for Orrin Hatch.

  69. dialing wrong numbers..... by hansreiser · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can you imagine, ring, ring, "Hello, is this Sheila? What an odd hissing noise. Sheila, are you there? I can hear faint noises.... Sheila, is there a man in your house? I hear him yelling. Pick up the phone! Oh dear, some man is crying, I can hear it.... Why doesn't anyone pick up the phone? I wonder if I dialed right."

  70. Those famous dead sea scrolls... by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1
    Those famous dead sea scrolls are famous because they lasted.

    A thousand years from now someone will find Those famous high-desert DVD-Rs... which some freak of preserving environments will have saved.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    1. Re:Those famous dead sea scrolls... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I think the most likely place that media will last for thousands of years will be at the poles.

  71. redundant self-destruction by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    What? And you DON'T have a backup?

    Okay, for the sake of argument, I've got a backup or two ... more self-destructing hard drives.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  72. Drive Features by Baseclass · · Score: 1

    I would like a feature where say 5 bad passwords destroys the drive. Type carefully!

    --
    ^^vv<><>BA
  73. Doorframe HERF trap by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    Now, put an RFID tag on the HDD, an RFID reader in the door frame, and one mother of an electromagnetic pulse triggered when the reader scans the tag. :) I'd rather HERF the sucker than use a magnet.

  74. This is so stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    A chemical mist? Which century are these guys living in?

    The way to do this is so simple, using plain old off-the-shelf drive components. Here's how you do it. Every drive sold today has a built-in buffer, so they all have built-in storage and processing which stores every block in RAM before writing it out to disk, and looks for the block in RAM before fetching it from disk. So there's a reasonable amount of smart electronics in there right now, and it's all totally transparent to the IDE interface. In other words, the host computer doesn't need to know anything about what the electronics are doing as they read and write blocks from the physical media.

    So the way to do this is to have an encryption operation put in the loop. The encryption key is stored in a small bit of ROM somewhere. There are two electrodes across this ROM, hooked up to a nice sized capacitor.

    When some triggering event (any kind of event which could be detected by some kind of electronics, which include all the same things this device works on) decides "it's time to make this disk unrecoverable" then that capacitor is discharged, turning the ROM (with the encryption key) into a little piece of melted glass.

    Problem solved! All using existing off-the-shelf stuff. It's something that could be easily retrofitted into existing drive designs for not much money. Some geek could probably put it together in a couple of weeks and start selling them. And because this is now being published here on Slashdot it can't be patented.

    It still boggles my mind. What are they doing messing around with chemicals to attempt to destroy a surface, when they could just do it all in electronics.

    They still need the same kind of tamper resistance, but this whole thing allows the disk's contents to be destroyed forever in microseconds, no chemical reactions needed, based on any electronic trigger.

    Oh yeah, there would also need to be a lithium battery to keep the destructo-capacitor charged, and there would need to be a circuit that discharges the capacitor if the case is tampered with, and all that other stuff. QED.

    1. Re:This is so stupid by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You assume that some complex number crunching formula will solve the problem of harvesting said data. The DoD, nor do most other govt agencies believe that. They use industrial shreeders and then sometimes even melt said shreadded metal into slag.

      A thermite coupled over a drive might be the wiser thing, with an (internal uplinked) serial device that ignites the thermite using outlet power (which you can derive from power supply.

      Then, there's fire hazard....... and Thermite reactions are mighty hard to stop ;)

      --
  75. Just got me one of these babies, and by TheNucleon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    it works gr

    --
    My comments are my own, and do not represent the views of my employer, my spouse, my children, or my cats.
  76. I bring you the Haliburton Hard Drive by gelfling · · Score: 1

    For only $9,000 a piece we can supply the entire DoD with hard drives that fight terrorism!

  77. magnetic door - mu-metal - isolation chamaber by chongo · · Score: 1
    Too bad you never heard of mu-metal:
    Mu-metal is a mixture containing two or more metallic elements or metallic and nonmetallic elements usually fused together or dissolving into each other when it is a molten-alloy. For example: 77% nickel, 15% iron and the rest usually copper and molybdenum. Mu-metal's main characteristic is that it is very magnetically soft.

    Surrounding a room temperature region with a reasonable mu-metal can shield that region from magnetic fields up to, say, 2000 Oersteds (0.2 Tesla). An external magnetic field below that level cannot penetrate the mu-metal enclosed region very well.

    Some mu-metal mixtures are better (> 4000 Oersteds = 0.4 Tesla effective shielding) and some are worse at shielding (< 1000 Oersteds = 0.1 tesla). There are non-mu-Metal magnetic field shielding methods as well.

    I would not be surprised if a disk drive inside of a good mu-metal case can pass through your door without any problem.

    On top of that counter-hack there is likely a number of other ways to get data into / out of your data center without going through that magnetic door.

    If you are trying to build/run a high security isolation data center then I'd recommend that you consult with someone who specializes in van Eck / Tempest security. Not only will they me able to assist you with building a good trap, they will be able help create an environment that can protect your data against a wide variety of other threats as well. Isolation data centers are a speciality. Unless you have that skill, or access to someone who does, all that you wind up with is a dead-bolt on a paper door that only gives you the illusion of security.

    IAAICS (I am an isolation chamber specialist).

    --
    chongo (was here) /\oo/\
    1. Re:magnetic door - mu-metal - isolation chamaber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Making the door/frame even a strong magnet is useless because the field strength falls off with the square of the distance. Remember that hard drives themselves contain powerful magnets to move the R/W heads.

      I would just make my datacenter door an MRI machine aperture. Let's see your mu-metal block my 5T pulsing field!

      Of course, I'd have to have encrypted fiber-optic Internet connections, etc...

      dom

    2. Re:magnetic door - mu-metal - isolation chamaber by chongo · · Score: 1
      " Making the door/frame even a strong magnet is useless because the field strength falls off ... "

      You are correct. That is why I believed that if someone went to the effort to construct such a door, then that person probably lacked access to someone who knew how to design isolation data centers.

      " I would just make my datacenter ... pulsing field "

      Exactly. A pulsed field is much harder to shield against than a static field. The very best (non-classified) shields fail above 0.5T. And they only approach shielding at 0.4T under the most ideal (which includes a constant field) conditions.

      " Of course, I'd have to have encrypted fiber-optic Internet connections, etc... "

      Yes which is why I suggested that there was "... likely a number of other ways to get data into / out of your data center without going through that magnetic door.". Their magnetic door seemed like it was an example of a cute paper door with a dead-bolt lock. I'd worry about the digital equivalent of paper walls long before I'd put a magnetic data trap in place.

      BTW: One "best practice" is to use a magnetic pulse inside a man-trap to detect the presence of electronic equipment (drives, tapes, anything electronics), read-only storage (CDs, DVDs, etc.), and shielded regions (mu-metal boxes, etc.). The intent is not to erase and destroy but to detect, inspect and correct.

      --
      chongo (was here) /\oo/\
  78. What I can't wait for... by ImaLamer · · Score: 3, Funny

    I want this for my kids!

    If someone tries to kidnap them, they blow up! If I can't have them no one can!

    Disclaimer: Don't worry, I don't actually have kids.

  79. Re:I think the 1999 Ig Nobel Peace Prize winners.. by kesuki · · Score: 1

    i prefer the hard drives that release a mild electric charge at the exact frequency and wavelength to stop a human heart instantly. for one, there is no burning corpse to dispose of, just a normal 'oh he had a heart attack' corpse to get rid of, a simple 911 call, the forensics finds his heart stopped, since the electric shock is so low voltage there are no burn marks, and none the wiser..

  80. It probably did little by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    Most amps like that have a diode across the power input, configured to be forward biased if the amp is hooked up backwards. That way all the current goes through the diode, and the amp sees only -.7V across it.

    The current then is enough to blow the fuse.

    Now, if you had removed the diode, and the fuse holder....

    Or better still, replaced the diode with a diode and a squib, and a little thermite.

    1. Re:It probably did little by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 2, Funny

      Jeez, you had to go and TELL him? He was feeling so good about his device :P

      --
      Freedom: "I won't!"
    2. Re:It probably did little by nolife · · Score: 1

      My amplifiers were from circa 1993. Reverse polarity protection was not used as much as it is now and I did not test these specific amplifiers for obvious reasons. Although... I'd still be happy enough knowing that they would continue to blow fuses. I also put my parents name and address (I move to much to have used mine) on the inside of one of the amps along with a big note saying "If this amplifier is being brought in for repair, and not the by the name above, it is stolen, please contact the above number etc.." or something like that. Now the ONLY reason I did that was because I had a sharpie handy when I had the amplifier apart to replace two of the output stage transistors that were defective. I really doubt anyone would actually call though.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  81. what ever happened to... by 5plicer · · Score: 1

    good old fashion plastic explosives?

    --
    The bits on the bus go on and off... on and off... on and off...
  82. Combo Attack by adipocere · · Score: 1

    Of course, you'd want a fuzzy logic trigger of some sort - not just a single thing to set it off.

    You'd want the files encrypted, so that, with just a handful of bytes per file corrupted, cracking the encryption would be trouble.

    I'd like to know what the "chemical mist" is.

    We had a slashdot article on this very thing many, many years ago. 1999? 2000? It was pointed out that using explosives could get you a nice criminal charge, and using most serious acids could also allow you to be creatively charged. Someone suggested an acid (and named) an acid that would work nicely on the top layer of the platters but be harmless to human skin.

    Any ideas?

    1. Re:Combo Attack by plover · · Score: 1
      TFA suggests "acid", but acid has a lot of unpleasant properties. I'd guess they could do something a bit more creative, such as a ferric chloride solution. That's the etchant I used as a kid to etch copper from circuit boards. Not that you'd want to drink it, but I occasionally got some on my skin. Turned it an odd shade of yellow, as I recall. No digits fell off, no skin was burned like it did with all the different acids I remember mishandling (the worst burn I ever got was with a highly concentrated acetic acid (the acid in vinegar!) used to mix up a photo stop-bath solution.)

      I've long thought about having such a self-destructing drive based on injecting a ferric chloride flood into the platter space. Obviously, the first thing to do would be a few experiments to ensure that ferric chloride really does wash the magnetic media from the platters. Next, it would take something close to a clean-room to remove the cover from the drive and drill and install the reservoir and injector system. Finally, it would take some damn clever software and hardware to properly ensure that the drive would be destroyed only at the appropriate time.

      [ My biggest reason for not doing this, however, is that I simply don't have anything worth protecting to that degree. If someone really really wants to see my tax records from 1997, well, I'm not about to sacrifice a $200 Western Digital Raptor to stop them. ]

      All this hardware protection is moot, however, if you live in Minnesota and are accused of "Child Pornography." We recently made the news because a local pervert involved in one of these sicko rings had encrypted files on his drive. He never revealed the keys to the investigators, but the judge allowed the fact that he had encrypted files to be used as "evidence". This, of course, was not the only evidence -- the prosecution had witnesses and other investigative work that really proved he was scum. However, the simple fact of "hiding something" was abused to help convict him -- regardless of what he was hiding. I have no doubt that the same judge in the same case would have used the existance of a self-destructive mechanism (triggered or not) to be permitted as "evidence".

      --
      John
    2. Re:Combo Attack by plover · · Score: 1
      Well, I just went to Ensconce Data's web site and snooped for a bit. They worked with local researchers to come up with a nontoxic chemical that apparently will destroy the data in "minutes".

      So they're officially not saying, but if they file a patent it'll be public knowledge. I'm still putting my money on ferric chloride, though.

      It was kind of interesting watching their marketing video. They listed a dozen different user-selectable triggers that could be used to destroy the data, including movement from a fixed GPS point, removal of power and/or backup power, an included RF remote (up to 100 foot range), phone call, internet transmitted signal, physically tampering with the drive, picking the computer up off the ground, a certain number of invalid password attempts, biometric scanner, local alarm or security system trigger, and some special keyboard-entered key sequence.

      --
      John
    3. Re:Combo Attack by iamroot · · Score: 1

      Even the chemical mist can be defeated.

      The most likely-to-work method I can think of at the moment is:

      You could bring some liquid nitrogen and drill a hole into the hard drive through the side of the computer. Quickly inject it with the LN. As a bonus, this will destroy the bearings, cause significant damage to the electronics, and probably stop any other protections. Take back to lab for analysis.

      By the time it detected a temp change, the mist would be frozen.

      It might also blow the chassis apart from the pressure if the holes were frozen over. You would need to quickly rip the drive out of the computer and put it in the dewar with LN to avoid this and to keep the mist frozen.

      It would be difficult and somewhat dangerous, but still possible.

    4. Re:Combo Attack by Igmuth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ferric chloride is acidic.

  83. Looks like IBM went back in the drive business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always wondered what happened to all the defective IBM drives from the 75 series. Looks like they found a new use for them.

  84. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Over a year? I thought it was in 1996.

  85. Sounds good to me by teeters · · Score: 1

    I like to have control over my property.

  86. kiddie pr0n? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yeah. Ashcroft and his supervisor, Dubbya, will LOVE this one. By the will of Allah, they'll make sure this company is taken good care of.

    Real. Good. Care.

  87. This should be standard equipment in all drives by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 1

    Maybe if they self-destructed every six months on the dot, my users would finally learn to back their shit up!

    Of course, they still wouldn't. It'd just be my fault somehow. Sigh.

    --
    Stasis is death. Embrace change.
  88. FreeBSD's geom disk encryption has something like by Calyth · · Score: 2, Informative

    It seems that FreeBSD's geom disk (or partition) encryption allows you to destroy all the master keys should the need arise. It's not the same as having the HD die on you, but if the disks take the end of the earth to actually decrypt, it's as good as dead.

  89. W32.Destructo Here we come! by AntiGenX · · Score: 1

    If this thing gets popular, how long you figure before someone writes a virus that triggers it?

  90. Here in Utah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    we glue a half-stick of dynamite to the disk drive and a self-igniting blasting cap to the cover. Remove the cover and the whole thing goes up in smoke!8-))

    At least that's what we told the students. Haven't had any problems yet - will keep you posted.

  91. Hmm no... by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

    I hear Aruba isn't so safe these days...

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  92. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by Rorschach1 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, was working on the same thing with thermite. Arguably does a better job at ensuring total destruction of the platters than a high explosive. Just needed a ceramic casing to contain it long enough to melt the whole drive into slag.

    A friend and I did some experiments that looked pretty promising. I'll have to post some video someday. Of course, we didn't have any actual use for such drives personally.. it was more just an excuse to melt scrap hardware into slag.

  93. You forgot the obligatory by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    "Nice hard drives you have there....it'd be a shame if something were to...happen...to them..."

    *Twidling fingers and evil smirk.* <-- obligatory

  94. Re:FreeBSD's geom disk encryption has something li by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

    Unless its based on ellipics, I dont trust it...

    Unless you believe that the NSA and such dont have Qubit based computers.....

    --
  95. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by temojen · · Score: 1
    Actually, C4 is no good at all ... too destructive

    You don't have to use the whole brick. I imagine about an ounce in direct contact with the drive enclosure ought to do the trick.

  96. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  97. Just post IP address as slashdot story by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    instant melt

  98. People, this is hardly insightful. by cfalcon · · Score: 1

    He just lists all the things that can go wrong with these setups. Well, duh. This isn't for Aunt Tillie or whatever, this is for corporations protecting trade secrets, *maybe* a backup data protection plan for the military, and radical individualists.

    All of these entities either have good backups or compelling reasons to take the risk.

    "Change of temperature of the drive: Ok Smart one..."

    Yes, it is. I'm sure the trivial cases you bring up were never thought of by the engineers there. You know, they wouldn't test things like "drive is accessed". It's also possible that someone would desire "AC goes dead" to blow their drive away, because their AC never goes dead and their tape backups are far safer than their operational systems- but recall that the military was at one point testing (and may have actually used) a type of hard drive replacement that used bacteria. Why? When the built in refrigeration unit goes, the bacteria were said to quickly lose the data. So something as trivial as "I want all the data to go away when the power does" is actually *desired* for some applications.

    "removal of the device from a resting GPS point: Doesn't GPS need line of site."

    You would presumably install it somewhere it *had* RF line of sight, and losing it would trigger the destruction. I wouldn't want this ever for my personal data, but that doesn't mean that there is no customer interested in this.

    "Cell Telephone Call. I can see it someone one has the number and code in their host list and acidently hit the button. Poof."

    Like, is everything in your world a terrible SNL skit or something? The war dialing would be a *serious* risk, assuming that you just have to dial the number. If you have to dial the number and enter an eight symbol confirm code, however, that's very different. I'll assume that that is actually the case, because that would make a lot more sense. You would also want a common number that would serve many customers, or else you will be mapping one of each telephone number to a hard drive, which seems silly.

    "Removal or Tampering: The system needs to be fixed..."

    Oh good grief.

    Look, I'll bet that these things go into use, and customers *DO* accidentally lose data from time to time. I'll also bet that those customers feel that an x% chance of losing data in a given year is worth it, because that just means that you take N*x (where N is the amount of money it costs your engineers to fix it) and budget that in. Maybe they'll end up thinking x is lower than it really is, but I can't imagine it would be that high.

  99. Re:A day late and a dollar short... by ShirKahn · · Score: 1

    A few years ago I set up a similar system for a private client who wanted to "dispose" of data in a hurry if needed. I never asked what he wanted it for, figuring the less I knew the better. We wraped 2 feet of demolision cord around the drive, covered that with a length of 1/16th inch copper to shape the charge. When we tested it- it cut a old full size Seagate completely in half. All this was attached to the "Turbo" button on the case. (Finally a practical use for that button)

  100. Great Disturbance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel a great disturbance in the Force. As if a million kilobytes worth of porno suddenly cried out in twisted pleasure, and then, suddenly, silence.

  101. Great Idea for my Evil Empire by pegasustonans · · Score: 1

    "Well minions, as you can see we have a new data destruction mechanism the workings of which are far too complex for your ant-brains to comprehend.

    It works like this: There are certain words that will trigger the catastrophic destruction of all data that the one who uttered the offending word has worked on. This is done by means of the flechette pistol you see mounted into the ceiling. In addition, this Japanese robot will then commence to cut someone in the room's finger off at random and give them a good hose down with the fire-extinguisher.

    I can tell you for certain the following words will not trigger the destruction: good, morning, time, for, lunch, bye and work.

    That is all. Any questions?

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
  102. Hard Drive "Death on Demand" is Murder! by Yay+Frogs · · Score: 1

    We abhor the destruction of innocent hard-drive life through hard-drive death on demand. We implore you to outlaw hard-drive abortions.

  103. Re:A day late and a dollar short... by ASUSanator · · Score: 1

    Hahaha thats classic :D

  104. Why so complicated?? by t_allardyce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For a much simpler method simply have a program load your private data into RAM on start-up and remove it from the disk with an insane number of write/erases, then put it back if you shut down properly (maybe a hidden key sequence and password).

    When the cops come to raid you they will just hit the power and rip the machine off your desk (how many times have you seen cops carrying computers out of raids on the news?), and viola, not only have they destroyed the evidence (technically it was their incompetence and nothing to do with you), they have _also_ destroyed the data copying program (which also copied into RAM) so there's no evidence that there was any evidence in the first place.

    Remember just destroying something is useless if you're left with a charred remains, that's evidence in itself and can get you into allot of trouble.

    The great advantage of this method is its hardware independent - you could potentially install it on any system in minutes, its untraceable in almost every way (buying a physical piece of hardware might be tracable, especially if your credit card bill says 'data safe hard disk' on it) and with the insane explosion in memory you can easily fit most things on it.

    The only downside would be unreliability if you lost power or had a crash but this can be over come with additional systems and UPS.

    I just hope that in this day and age we're not breaking any laws by just talking about data destruction.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    1. Re:Why so complicated?? by StrongAxe · · Score: 1

      Right. And one trip-over-the-power cord, or one BSOD crash, or one local power failure (if you aren't running a UPS) and all your data is toast. On the other hand, you had better hope your machine is powered up when the cops arrive, or else your data will be embarrasingly visible.

  105. back in ww-2 by Senor_Programmer · · Score: 1

    we had these squibs in the sensitive electronics. tampering would set off a small explosive or thermal charge and destroy the 'secret bits'. It's much less expensive to do pyrotechnically. Pyro can be safe too.

  106. Your mission, Mr. Phelps is to by museumpeace · · Score: 1

    find the market of people crazy enough to buy a disk drive that might quit working when they least need it too. This disk will self destruct in ten seconds.

    --
    SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
  107. Bad analogy... by Chmcginn · · Score: 1
    Ebola kills almost every human, period. And it doesn't spread well outside of humans. So, yes, it is pretty self-limiting.

    However, to most computers in the world, this would appear to be a payload-less virus (or worm)- only the tiny percentage with this style of drive would notice any ill effects. (Besides possible bandwidth usage.)

    --
    Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
  108. Dead without demand by j0ris · · Score: 2, Funny
    Ha! These guys got nothing on the good ol' IBM Deathstar.

    This baby did't need some silly demand to die. Plus, it featured the "click of death" (TM).

    Ah well, they just don't make 'm like they used to!

  109. Software Destruction Instead! by Tangurena · · Score: 1

    At a previous employer, they had a very high turn over of consultants. Since they considered the data on the hard drive to be a corporate asset, they wanted the stuff fragged if the employee quit or was about to be fired. So the company starts this quiet project to build something that would wipe the drive. It was expected that this would be buggy, and go off randomly, so that the consultants wouldn't be surprised when their laptop became a brick (if everyone who's laptop locked up was subsequently fired, or if their laptop locked up when they were fired, it would tell the consultants too much information). The project was cancelled in 2001 when it was discovered that there were a number of commercial products doing this stuff. The SysAdmins rejoiced when the project was cancelled since the network virus checker was constantly complaining that our group was infected with about 30 virii and trojans each.

  110. Dial M for (hard disk) murder by mousse-man · · Score: 1

    just image a telemarketer calls that phone number...

  111. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no yearly fee for this drive. The yearly fees apply to other services mentioned in the article. Those involve a third party who you are paying for an ongoing service, unlike the misting device where a piece of hardware does all the work.

  112. Re:Aaaargh! What happen??? by NeoThermic · · Score: 1

    Yes! There's an idea! Line the case with something thats known to cause cancer! (/sarcasim)

    The best thing for localised destruction would probibally be a shaped charge. Getting it right, you could use just one charge for all your drives; the explosive force being focused down through the main part of the disks, thus destroying them.

    The other advantage of the shaped charge is that you'll only leave a hefty hole in the carpet, not a burning smoldering mass inside a case..

    NeoThermic

    --
    Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
  113. Harm Principle...Good Arguements Against? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " not4chan.org == "drawn" 'xxxxxxxxxx', you sick fuck."

    Replace 'xxxxxxxxxx' with gay men or women kissing, black / white sex, women naked (in many muslim countries), midgets, and I don't think it would make a material difference to that statement.

    No, the key word you should have clued into there is "drawn" I think.

    As well since, so far as I know ;), a drawing does not harm anyone thus if you follow the harm principle then it should be allowed. If you do not believe in the harm principle I'm sure you have a an arguement to justify laws in disallowing behaviours that harm no one (or only the person themself).

  114. Now and in Some Countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Being sexually attracted to 6 or 8 year olds is not a crime. Acting on those attractions is."

    Acting on those attractions now, instead of say 2000-3000 years ago in Greece and other places, in some countries is.

  115. Re:FreeBSD's geom disk encryption has something li by Calyth · · Score: 1

    I can't remember whether it's based on ellipics...

    NSA has historically been asked to intercept, gather, compile, etc... data for stuff like espionage, foreign policy and stuff like that. They do far more intelligence work than what the public thinks CIA is doing. I'm sure NSA have enough server farms to crack many of the encryption, but I would think if you made the government to ship your disks to NSA to be decrypted, I think you got other things to worry about than cracking the actual data.

    Incidentally, I just might be flagged for saying that.