Slashdot Mirror


White House Says Hard Drives Were Destroyed

wanderindiana brings us an update on the White House missing emails mess, which we have discussed before. It seems the hard drives of many White House computers are gone beyond the possibility of recovery. Is it unusual in your experience for, say, a corporate IT department to destroy hard drives by policy? "Older White House computer hard drives have been destroyed, the White House disclosed to a federal court Friday in a controversy over millions of possibly missing e-mails from 2003 to 2005. The White House revealed new information about how it handles its computers in an effort to persuade a federal magistrate it would be fruitless to undertake an e-mail recovery plan that the court proposed."

7 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Awesome! by WilyCoder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Awesome! Now arrest them for obstruction of Justice.

  2. Re:No it is not usual by samurphy21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it unusual in your experience for, say, a corporate IT department to destroy hard drives by policy?

    During my employ as a contractor with the Canadian Department of National Defence, it was standard for decomissioned (read: hellishly outdated) systems to be stripped of RAM and HD, by policy, before being sold off as a lot as surplus/scrap. The RAM and HD would then be sent to an industrial grade metal shredder at a larger nearby base for destruction.

    Granted, this was for workstation systems where no personal or private data was to be stored. Again, by policy. I'm unsure what the policy would be for servers where email was stored. Probably still destroy the physical hard drive, but the final backup tapes are more than likely to be kept under lock and key for eternity.

  3. Not really the point by Gription · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The IT staff either is malicious or highly incompetent.

    Or following orders. They were almost certainly following policy. The complaint here is that the data is missing/destroyed. The data is supposed to be retained by a backup solution. The hard drives are only a 'working area'. Sure the data is stored there while someone is actively using the computer but as soon as it leaves the person's desk it is now a security risk.

    The drives should be thoroughly wiped and then recycled or destroyed. That is good IT policy. I run the IT hardware division for my company that supplies and supports customer's computers. When any computer is repaired or replaced the old drive is dated, put into secure storage for a minimum of 30 days, and then DOD wiped, and then recycled or physically destroyed. (The magnets are really good for hanging things on cubical walls.)

    The reason our drives are 'aged' for 30 days is because we can't trust our customers to have a good backup. (or ANY backup...) The White House shouldn't have any issues with their backups so they have no reason to retain the drives. This brings us back to the backup question. The rule for a really secure backup methodology is, "Multiple methods of backup, and multiple media". About 10 years ago I saw an article in a trade journal (InfoWorld?) that quoted the statistic that after a catastrophic data loss, 15% of the time the backup method itself is found to be flawed. Having 2 methods of backup would reduce the chance of an unrecoverable flaw to 2.25% which is much more acceptable.

    The solution to the White House problem is the judicious use of pink slips. Fire any one who bowed to pressure and allowed this to happen. (or was incompetent enough to allow a flawed backup scheme...)
    1. Re:Not really the point by Zooperman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In a corporate environment that may be good IT policy... but in a government body, communications between individuals or departments are by definition the property of the people of the United States. Those communications should NOT be destroyed, now or ever. Once the current administration leaves office they should be transferred to the National Archives (unless deemed classified); just as the documents, tapes and videos of previous administrations were handled. There may have been incompetence involved, but at the very least this raises questions about accountability and suggests a cover-up; and the tinfoil hat-wearers out there already have enough conspiracy theory ammunition to last for the next 100 years as it is.

      --
      Zooperman
  4. Re:Privacy? On Government networks? by penix1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why wouldn't these people do their planning outside of the government network, using email with encryption (PGP)? All of them could easily create Yahoo or Google accounts, or they could even create their own little domain name with their own server and run it all with encryption. Then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.


    That's exactly why we are having this conversation because Cheney et. al. did exactly that. They used outside email servers against the law and got caught. They were using the RNC servers and when handed a subpoena for their email claimed it was all lost. It turns out they weren't all lost much to the chagrin of the administration.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040402404.html

    http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1362

    Of course, nobody will be punished in the least for violating The Presidential Records Act.
    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  5. Re:A way to check... by SL+Baur · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Name the last independent President. William Howard Taft http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/wt27.html

    Dumped by his handlers when he refused to be a typical President and was replaced by Woody Wilson who blessed us with the Federal Income Tax, the Federal Reserve and after running as "The President who kept us out of war", gave us World War I.

    It's very sad that we have to go back a hundred years to find an honest President and I guess that proves your point.
  6. Re:How they are destroyed by Gription · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So does a simple low-level format. Unless you can cite any actual cases of data being recovered from a low-level-formatted drive that involve modern (IE *not* MFM) drives. Had lunch last Wednesday with a guy who has a full time job recovering data from drives that are anything short of a full DOD wipe. He is a forensic computer examiner and has degrees in mathematics and in cryptography. He had a number of fascinating stories about nailing people who thought a couple complete overwrites of the drive would cover their tracks. A repeated low level format is a cake walk for him because there is no alternation of the bit pattern. The regular repeating pattern makes it easy to analyze the magnetic boundaries and recover a drive.