On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 15:35 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > I looked into the ATA side a bit more. The hdparm command has > --security-erase and --security-erase-enhanced options that look like > they should use the ATA functions in question. This could well be > more suitable for the paranoid than 'shred' is. However, for these > features the current hdparm manual says "THIS FEATURE IS EXPERIMENTAL > AND NOT WELL TESTED. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK." So perhaps 'shred' should > wait a bit before using this kind of facility, even if it's faster and > more-secure. > > In the meantime, perhaps the EFF would like to test hdparm? (On their > own drives, not mine! :-)
Those hdparm commands zap the entire drive. We could test them, although it'd be hard to test them in any interesting way. I saw some mentions of an ATA secure blockwise erase too. That should really be linked to chattr +s in the filesystem code. Maybe once we've got the userspace parts of this problem sorted, we could look at that... -- Peter Eckersley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Staff Technologist Tel +1 415 436 9333 x131 Electronic Frontier Foundation Fax +1 415 436 9993 _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
