Well you can't degauss a modern hard disk and then re-use it... so unless you have lots of bulk tape there's no point investing in a degausser since it's essentially free to destroy at the NSA
So? I don't get to destroy my data at the NSA. If you'd bothered to read my original post, I was talking about HIPPA protected data. I have no ties to the NSA. So I don't get to have the NSA destroy my data for free. I was talking about destruction up to the level of those of DOD published standards. DSS is part of the DOD. And these were standards published by it.
Also, DSS released that matrix years ago. It's not an official part of the NISPOM, and people like to claim that it is. It's just a guide.
Where exactly did I claim it was part of the "Operating Manual"???
And it certainly was issued as a part of NISP.
"This Manual is issued in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program (NISP). The Manual prescribes requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards that are necessary to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information and to control authorized disclosure of classified information released by U.S. Government Executive Branch Departments and Agencies to their contractors. The Manual also prescribes requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards that are necessary to protect special classes of classified information, including Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, intelligence sources and methods information, Sensitive Compartmented Information, and Special Access Program information. These procedures are applicable to licensees, grantees, and certificate holders to the extent legally and practically possible within the constraints of applicable law and the Code of Federal Regulations."
It's just not in the current NISP Operating Manual. The data destruction methods in the current NISPOM are mainly concerned with paper/microfilm. There is no explicit mention of any other storage media in the destruction section.
DoD grade is complete destruction by an NSA-approved procedure. They remove and shred the platters.
Please don't perpetuate that myth.
Actually there are several different levels of DOD grade in handling of hard drives depending on the grade of the information on them (unclassified, secret, top secret, etc).
Approved ways to 'Sanatize' (as opposed to 'Clear') hard drives include:
"d. Overwrite all addressable locations with a character, its complement, then a random character and verify. THIS METHOD IS NOT APPROVED FOR SANITIZING MEDIA THAT CONTAINS TOP SECRET INFORMATION."
So overwriting is indeed DOD approved, just not for "top Secret" information.
Top Secret data may be 'Sanatized' by:
"a. Degauss with a Type I degausser" "b. Degauss with a Type II degausser."
As well as
"m. Destroy - Disintegrate, incinerate, pulverize, shred, or melt."
-- which seems to be the only one you are familiar with.
Please do your research before accusing someone of perpetuating myths.
There are *lots* of them out there. What OS do you want a tool to run under, or do you want it to run off a bootable CD/floppy?
All you need is a tool that overwrites the drive multiple times. Preferably with all 0's then all 1's then random, then the inverse of that random, etc. DOD grade is 7 overwrites I think. I typically do 13 overwrites on the drives I'm disposing which at one time or another may have had HIPPA protected data on them.
Most, if not all, of the research (and the money that the scientist makes) in an academic facility is funded by contracts with commercial companies.
Umm, I don't know what field you work in, but in biology, much of it is funded by the NIH or other government agencies. The NIH funded research to the tune of almost $29 Billion last year. It's not a service model, it's public funding for advancements in basic and medical research.
Sometimes the advancements are indeed bought buy Pharmaceutical companies to use (with their money further funding the researchers and universities), other times new companies are spun off of the discoveries, but all the discoveries are made public where any researcher anywhere in the world can use them to further their own understanding of science and their research.
RAID 1 + 0 is faster than RAID 5though, because no parity bit needs calculating. There are trade-offs in all the RAID configurations. Pick the one that suits your needs best.
Maybe because you don't have any spare drive bays in your case and don't want to attach a bunch of external USB/FIREWIRE/SCSI/SATA drives and the accompanying spaghetti wire? Some folks like keeping things condensed.
Personally all my cases hold 12 drives, so that's not an issue for me (yet).
But I agree entirely that the original poster is asking a really dumb question for the reason he stated. Certainly I'd trust a used hard drive to store my data in my computer, because I have backups. Not having backups, as it seems might be the case for him, is incredibly stupid. If your data is already backed up in a couple different places, there is no need to worry about your 'used' drive going bad.
The sad thing is, this was a CS professor. If anyone should realize they should have that stuff in an encrypted file/partition, it's a CS professor.
But you are exactly right, they should never use SSNs as student ID's, and there should be an IT policy to keep that stuff encrypted for all the other professors in other departments who are unlikely to be as clued in to computer security as this CS professor SHOULD have been.
If you had bothered to read my post, you would have seen that a quarter of the estate tax paid in the entire country is paid by ~500 estates. The ultra wealthy *are* paying the tax.
Certainly they are smart enough to shelter much of their money as well as transfer a lot of their money to their children, before they die. Even with doing all that, there is enough money in the estates of these ultra-rich that they are still paying a quarter of all estate taxes collected. I'll leave it to the reader to consider how much they might have paid if they hadn't sheltered any...
The only way a cash cow does not turn into a dead cow is through multiple releases which are sold to end users, offering newer features for devotees and fixing some of the most egregious integration problems for enterprises. Without new versions, people grow out of a product. Users adopt a new methodology entirely, or adopt a new product from someone else.
Somehow this sounds like accusing MS of doing some evil thing by deliberately creating upgrades for people.
Is anyone still using Linux 1.0, or Open/Net/FreeBSD 1.0? How about Emacs 1.0? Apache 1.0? OpenOffice 1.0? Still no takers?
Pretty much any 'big' software package you care to mention is going to have new versions come out over time. Any big package is going to have bugs that need fixed. Any big package is going to have a large percentage of it's users want some new features the wasn't thought of, or feasible on current hardware, when it was originally created. This is hardly surprising or a "MS trick to keep you on a treadmill".
And very few people who upgrade one software package want to be forced to upgrade/change all the other software they use. Occasionally it will happen, say when someone changes entire platforms (mac to windows or vice versa) when they think the move is worth the extra expense/drawbacks to them, but this happens infrequently, so backewards compatibility is key. There's nothing "MS-only" about it.
That's kind of like asking why chips don't have just one really-really-really fast pipeline rather than several. With several you can do more things at once.
There will always be a speed limit your electronics can go at. We are pushing against some heat/size limits. The most realistic way to go faster is to split up the tasks as much as possible and have multiple piplines/cores/CPUs/Computers work on them at once.
The scare part (IANAL) is I think in contract disputes, it might be the case that the penalty depends on monetary loses caused by the breaking of it. In the case of free software that would be...
You have been listening to propaganda about the inheritance tax.
I'm from a very rural area. Most of my old hometown friends are farmers. The inheritance tax isn't an issue for any of them. None of them knows anyone who has lost a farm because of it. If you know of a documented case, please post it. Otherwise, it's nonsense.
Only 2% of estates pay any estate tax at all. Most of those just pay a relatively small amount. The inheritance tax only has a real effect on a very small fraction of the top 1% of estates. A quarter of the total estate tax is paid by only about 500 estates each year. Half of the estate taxes each year come from only about 3,000 estates in the entire country. Current estate tax exempts the first million of an estate, and for the owners of businesses (including farms) it's even higher.
Republicans have been challenged over and over to provide one example of someone losing their farm because of the estate tax... they haven't. It just doesn't happen.
There is nothing wrong with a night scope in and of itself. Many private eyes use them for completely legal activity, let along sportsmen, etc. I hope their case isn't that flimsy.
That's why dirty bombs are more psychological weapons than destructive weapons. They aren't that dangerous, but they psych people out, and are a big cleanup expense.
Unfortunately most of the people in your group do the exact same thing and try to impose your values and beliefs on the Republicans. Gay marriage, abortion, freedom to practice religion, etc.
Where exactly are the liberals forcing Republican women to have abortions, or forcing heterosexual Republicans to marry gays? Sorry, they aren't forcing their beliefs on you. If the Republicans don't want to have abortions, don't have them. Don't want to be in a gay marriage, don't marry one. No forcing going on. Republicans are forcing their views on others by preventing everyone from doing things they disagree with.
Freedom to practice religion is a good thing. You are free to practice yours. Just don't try to force yours on me.
The Fed *SHOULD* be running a debt in the bad times, it should be running up lots and lots of debt, and in good times it should be making a surplus.
Then the only 'good times' we've had in the past 26 years was for a few when a DEMOCRAT was in office and rejecting crappy budgets by Republicans who were putting too much in them. The debt has been growing at an astronomical rate for the past 26 years. Anyone who thinks this is sustainable or a good idea is an idiot.
Maybe think a little for yourself rather than repeat partisan talking points.
There are plenty of Catholics that are pro-contraception, and/or pro-choice, and with many other views that go against official church teachings. That doesn't make them hypocrites. In just about any major religion you can name, there are plenty of members who have different views on some of the teachings.
But if you are for something they don't like, and let them know it, at worst a certain priest at a certain church might refuse you communion. Even that is unlikely, but that's pretty much the limit.
The Catholic church doesn't pass laws that affect your ability to run fundamental parts of your daily life as you see fit. The Republicans can, and are trying to do just that. It's an entirely different class of thing.
With that said, I've got to agree with the grandparent, that if you are gay and a Republican, you probably are a bit of a self-loathing hypocrite. Else, why join? The Republicans haven't been for fiscal responsibility for a quarter of a century. The only thing they stand for these days is for the ultra-rich and the religious right.
They're not bad people (the homophobes, that is), they just have no ability to empathise.
That's like saying racists aren't bad people, they just have no ability to empathise.
Racists are bad people. Having no empathy does make you a bad person because you can blatantly harm other people without giving any thought to them.
Personally I think gay people are crazy for wanting marriage (and divorce and alimony, and all the other headaches that come with it), but if they want it, they are more than welcome to it in my book. Misery loves company.
In reality, the vast majority of people who identify themselves as aligning with the Republican Party do so because of economic reasons not social policies.
Perhaps it will allow the Republican Party to purge these idiotic socially ultra-conservative nuts and return to being economically conservative instead (which is the *real* base of the Republican Party).
Sorry, I'm an old-timer fiscal conservative. Which means I've hated the Republican party since Reagan came into office. Before 1980 the Republicans were for smaller government and less spending. But for the past quarter century, they have been spend crazy. They have created a far far bigger bloated government than any Democrats ever did. For the past 26 years, the Democrats have acted much more fiscally conservative than Republicans. If you are a fiscal conservative and still a Republican these days, you are as ignorant of the world around you as people who claimed 'the world changed on 9/11'. Wake up.
Noise canceling headphones do protect your hearing but most civilian models don't afford serious protection at those dB levels.
I guess that depends on what 'those db levels' are. The original/. question, and concern of many in the forum, was about use in a computer server room. The levels in a server room aren't 'insta-deafening', and won't hurt you in the short term, but over long term (years) of exposure, can have a detrimental effect on your hearing ability. For the application under discussion, consumer grade noise canceling headphones are just fine. Most/. users aren't operating jackhammers all day, or flying military choppers. Consumer grade headphones will do just fine for the majority of us.
Why exactly won't they protect your hearing? They send an inverted soundwave which cancels out the ambiant soundswaves. Cancelled waves = no damage. They don't cancel everything, but they knock it way down.
Don't forget Bluetooth has no real meaningful encryption. Whatever protocol they are using for over-the-air backups certainly should have encryption available.
Exactly. Unless you have some real reason for changing it to Open Source, it sounds like a really bad idea.
If you just want some warm fuzzies, instead I'd suggest you help out by working on Open/Free/NetBSD or Linux, or Apache, or one of any number of OS tools you might use around the company when you aren't coding on your proprietary product. Work on the already open OS tool to improve it for your own use, as well as contributing back to the community. You can do that on the side when you aren't programming/supporting your real proprietary product. Warm and fuzzy without trashing your current business model.
Slashdot Mirror
Well you can't degauss a modern hard disk and then re-use it... so unless you have lots of bulk tape there's no point investing in a degausser since it's essentially free to destroy at the NSA
So? I don't get to destroy my data at the NSA. If you'd bothered to read my original post, I was talking about HIPPA protected data. I have no ties to the NSA. So I don't get to have the NSA destroy my data for free. I was talking about destruction up to the level of those of DOD published standards. DSS is part of the DOD. And these were standards published by it.
Also, DSS released that matrix years ago. It's not an official part of the NISPOM, and people like to claim that it is. It's just a guide.
Where exactly did I claim it was part of the "Operating Manual"???
And it certainly was issued as a part of NISP.
"This Manual is issued in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program (NISP). The Manual prescribes requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards that are necessary to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information and to control authorized disclosure of classified information released by U.S. Government Executive Branch Departments and Agencies to their contractors. The Manual also prescribes requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards that are necessary to protect special classes of classified information, including Restricted Data, Formerly Restricted Data, intelligence sources and methods information, Sensitive Compartmented Information, and Special Access Program information. These procedures are applicable to licensees, grantees, and certificate holders to the extent legally and practically possible within the constraints of applicable law and the Code of Federal Regulations."
It's just not in the current NISP Operating Manual. The data destruction methods in the current NISPOM are mainly concerned with paper/microfilm. There is no explicit mention of any other storage media in the destruction section.
DoD grade is complete destruction by an NSA-approved procedure. They remove and shred the platters.
Please don't perpetuate that myth.
Actually there are several different levels of DOD grade in handling of hard drives depending on the grade of the information on them (unclassified, secret, top secret, etc).
I refer you to the Clearing and Sanitization Matrix.
Approved ways to 'Sanatize' (as opposed to 'Clear') hard drives include:
"d. Overwrite all addressable locations with a character, its complement, then a random character and verify. THIS METHOD IS NOT APPROVED FOR SANITIZING MEDIA THAT CONTAINS TOP SECRET INFORMATION."
So overwriting is indeed DOD approved, just not for "top Secret" information.
Top Secret data may be 'Sanatized' by:
"a. Degauss with a Type I degausser"
"b. Degauss with a Type II degausser."
As well as
"m. Destroy - Disintegrate, incinerate, pulverize, shred, or melt."
-- which seems to be the only one you are familiar with.
Please do your research before accusing someone of perpetuating myths.
There are *lots* of them out there. What OS do you want a tool to run under, or do you want it to run off a bootable CD/floppy?
All you need is a tool that overwrites the drive multiple times. Preferably with all 0's then all 1's then random, then the inverse of that random, etc. DOD grade is 7 overwrites I think. I typically do 13 overwrites on the drives I'm disposing which at one time or another may have had HIPPA protected data on them.
Most, if not all, of the research (and the money that the scientist makes) in an academic facility is funded by contracts with commercial companies.
Umm, I don't know what field you work in, but in biology, much of it is funded by the NIH or other government agencies. The NIH funded research to the tune of almost $29 Billion last year. It's not a service model, it's public funding for advancements in basic and medical research.
Sometimes the advancements are indeed bought buy Pharmaceutical companies to use (with their money further funding the researchers and universities), other times new companies are spun off of the discoveries, but all the discoveries are made public where any researcher anywhere in the world can use them to further their own understanding of science and their research.
Your feeling would be wrong.
RAID 1 + 0 is faster than RAID 5though, because no parity bit needs calculating. There are trade-offs in all the RAID configurations. Pick the one that suits your needs best.
Why REPLACE a drive when you can ADD a drive ?
Maybe because you don't have any spare drive bays in your case and don't want to attach a bunch of external USB/FIREWIRE/SCSI/SATA drives and the accompanying spaghetti wire? Some folks like keeping things condensed.
Personally all my cases hold 12 drives, so that's not an issue for me (yet).
But I agree entirely that the original poster is asking a really dumb question for the reason he stated. Certainly I'd trust a used hard drive to store my data in my computer, because I have backups. Not having backups, as it seems might be the case for him, is incredibly stupid. If your data is already backed up in a couple different places, there is no need to worry about your 'used' drive going bad.
The sad thing is, this was a CS professor. If anyone should realize they should have that stuff in an encrypted file/partition, it's a CS professor.
But you are exactly right, they should never use SSNs as student ID's, and there should be an IT policy to keep that stuff encrypted for all the other professors in other departments who are unlikely to be as clued in to computer security as this CS professor SHOULD have been.
If you had bothered to read my post, you would have seen that a quarter of the estate tax paid in the entire country is paid by ~500 estates. The ultra wealthy *are* paying the tax.
Certainly they are smart enough to shelter much of their money as well as transfer a lot of their money to their children, before they die. Even with doing all that, there is enough money in the estates of these ultra-rich that they are still paying a quarter of all estate taxes collected. I'll leave it to the reader to consider how much they might have paid if they hadn't sheltered any...
The only way a cash cow does not turn into a dead cow is through multiple releases which are sold to end users, offering newer features for devotees and fixing some of the most egregious integration problems for enterprises. Without new versions, people grow out of a product. Users adopt a new methodology entirely, or adopt a new product from someone else.
Somehow this sounds like accusing MS of doing some evil thing by deliberately creating upgrades for people.
Is anyone still using Linux 1.0, or Open/Net/FreeBSD 1.0? How about Emacs 1.0? Apache 1.0? OpenOffice 1.0? Still no takers?
Pretty much any 'big' software package you care to mention is going to have new versions come out over time. Any big package is going to have bugs that need fixed. Any big package is going to have a large percentage of it's users want some new features the wasn't thought of, or feasible on current hardware, when it was originally created. This is hardly surprising or a "MS trick to keep you on a treadmill".
And very few people who upgrade one software package want to be forced to upgrade/change all the other software they use. Occasionally it will happen, say when someone changes entire platforms (mac to windows or vice versa) when they think the move is worth the extra expense/drawbacks to them, but this happens infrequently, so backewards compatibility is key. There's nothing "MS-only" about it.
That's kind of like asking why chips don't have just one really-really-really fast pipeline rather than several. With several you can do more things at once.
There will always be a speed limit your electronics can go at. We are pushing against some heat/size limits. The most realistic way to go faster is to split up the tasks as much as possible and have multiple piplines/cores/CPUs/Computers work on them at once.
No, it's a violation of a contract case.
The scare part (IANAL) is I think in contract disputes, it might be the case that the penalty depends on monetary loses caused by the breaking of it. In the case of free software that would be...
The lawyers are gonna have a fun time.
It's kind of hard to roll over when someone is kneeling on your neck.
If anyone was kneeling on my neck I'd probably grab an inner thigh or whatever I could so that I could start breathing again too.
You have been listening to propaganda about the inheritance tax.
I'm from a very rural area. Most of my old hometown friends are farmers. The inheritance tax isn't an issue for any of them. None of them knows anyone who has lost a farm because of it. If you know of a documented case, please post it. Otherwise, it's nonsense.
Only 2% of estates pay any estate tax at all. Most of those just pay a relatively small amount. The inheritance tax only has a real effect on a very small fraction of the top 1% of estates. A quarter of the total estate tax is paid by only about 500 estates each year. Half of the estate taxes each year come from only about 3,000 estates in the entire country. Current estate tax exempts the first million of an estate, and for the owners of businesses (including farms) it's even higher.
Republicans have been challenged over and over to provide one example of someone losing their farm because of the estate tax... they haven't. It just doesn't happen.
There is nothing wrong with a night scope in and of itself. Many private eyes use them for completely legal activity, let along sportsmen, etc. I hope their case isn't that flimsy.
Better be careful, carrying lock picks in certain jurisdictions is a crime. Including Washington D.C.
That's why dirty bombs are more psychological weapons than destructive weapons. They aren't that dangerous, but they psych people out, and are a big cleanup expense.
Unfortunately most of the people in your group do the exact same thing and try to impose your values and beliefs on the Republicans. Gay marriage, abortion, freedom to practice religion, etc.
Where exactly are the liberals forcing Republican women to have abortions, or forcing heterosexual Republicans to marry gays? Sorry, they aren't forcing their beliefs on you. If the Republicans don't want to have abortions, don't have them. Don't want to be in a gay marriage, don't marry one. No forcing going on. Republicans are forcing their views on others by preventing everyone from doing things they disagree with.
Freedom to practice religion is a good thing. You are free to practice yours. Just don't try to force yours on me.
The Fed *SHOULD* be running a debt in the bad times, it should be running up lots and lots of debt, and in good times it should be making a surplus.
Then the only 'good times' we've had in the past 26 years was for a few when a DEMOCRAT was in office and rejecting crappy budgets by Republicans who were putting too much in them. The debt has been growing at an astronomical rate for the past 26 years. Anyone who thinks this is sustainable or a good idea is an idiot.
Maybe think a little for yourself rather than repeat partisan talking points.
There are plenty of Catholics that are pro-contraception, and/or pro-choice, and with many other views that go against official church teachings. That doesn't make them hypocrites. In just about any major religion you can name, there are plenty of members who have different views on some of the teachings.
But if you are for something they don't like, and let them know it, at worst a certain priest at a certain church might refuse you communion. Even that is unlikely, but that's pretty much the limit.
The Catholic church doesn't pass laws that affect your ability to run fundamental parts of your daily life as you see fit. The Republicans can, and are trying to do just that. It's an entirely different class of thing.
With that said, I've got to agree with the grandparent, that if you are gay and a Republican, you probably are a bit of a self-loathing hypocrite. Else, why join? The Republicans haven't been for fiscal responsibility for a quarter of a century. The only thing they stand for these days is for the ultra-rich and the religious right.
They're not bad people (the homophobes, that is), they just have no ability to empathise.
That's like saying racists aren't bad people, they just have no ability to empathise.
Racists are bad people. Having no empathy does make you a bad person because you can blatantly harm other people without giving any thought to them.
Personally I think gay people are crazy for wanting marriage (and divorce and alimony, and all the other headaches that come with it), but if they want it, they are more than welcome to it in my book. Misery loves company.
In reality, the vast majority of people who identify themselves as aligning with the Republican Party do so because of economic reasons not social policies.
Perhaps it will allow the Republican Party to purge these idiotic socially ultra-conservative nuts and return to being economically conservative instead (which is the *real* base of the Republican Party).
Sorry, I'm an old-timer fiscal conservative. Which means I've hated the Republican party since Reagan came into office. Before 1980 the Republicans were for smaller government and less spending. But for the past quarter century, they have been spend crazy. They have created a far far bigger bloated government than any Democrats ever did. For the past 26 years, the Democrats have acted much more fiscally conservative than Republicans. If you are a fiscal conservative and still a Republican these days, you are as ignorant of the world around you as people who claimed 'the world changed on 9/11'. Wake up.
Noise canceling headphones do protect your hearing but most civilian models don't afford serious protection at those dB levels.
/. question, and concern of many in the forum, was about use in a computer server room. The levels in a server room aren't 'insta-deafening', and won't hurt you in the short term, but over long term (years) of exposure, can have a detrimental effect on your hearing ability. For the application under discussion, consumer grade noise canceling headphones are just fine. Most /. users aren't operating jackhammers all day, or flying military choppers. Consumer grade headphones will do just fine for the majority of us.
I guess that depends on what 'those db levels' are. The original
Why exactly won't they protect your hearing? They send an inverted soundwave which cancels out the ambiant soundswaves. Cancelled waves = no damage. They don't cancel everything, but they knock it way down.
Don't forget Bluetooth has no real meaningful encryption. Whatever protocol they are using for over-the-air backups certainly should have encryption available.
Exactly. Unless you have some real reason for changing it to Open Source, it sounds like a really bad idea.
If you just want some warm fuzzies, instead I'd suggest you help out by working on Open/Free/NetBSD or Linux, or Apache, or one of any number of OS tools you might use around the company when you aren't coding on your proprietary product. Work on the already open OS tool to improve it for your own use, as well as contributing back to the community. You can do that on the side when you aren't programming/supporting your real proprietary product. Warm and fuzzy without trashing your current business model.