Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number generator. Shred seems to have such. You're better off with /dev/urandom, it's much easier to understand what it's trying to do, vs the rather baroque logic in s

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 11:21:08 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:35:11AM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > > … but not much. For me, "standard

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 01:03:44PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > On 2/13/24 09:40, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > > Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the > > > file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 16:00, David Christensen wrote: On 2/13/24 11:31, gene heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When they & the startech usb3 adapters arrive.  I'll get that NAS built for amanda yet. 2.5" SATA SSD's and SATA to USB adapter cables for $187.97 + $10.99 = $

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 09:40, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: Greg Wooledge wrote: Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, that will overwrite the original private information. On modern devices, it may not.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 11:31, gene heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When they & the startech usb3 adapters arrive.  I'll get that NAS built for amanda yet. 2.5" SATA SSD's and SATA to USB adapter cables for $187.97 + $10.99 = $198.96 each set? https://www.amazon.com/d

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 14:44, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When f3 has (hopefully) given its OK, the topic of a full write-and-read test will come up again. I'm looking forward to all the spin-off topics. I'll have to admit it has been

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Gene Heskett wrote: > Next experiment is a pair of 4T Silicon Power SSD's When f3 has (hopefully) given its OK, the topic of a full write-and-read test will come up again. I'm looking forward to all the spin-off topics. Have a nice day :) Thomas

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: > Heh. Don't forget your own attempts to use a shredder as a PRNG stream. My original idea was to watch a minimal shred run by teeing its work into a checksummer. But then topic drift came in. So we got a farm show of random generators and a discussion about what exactl

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/13/24 12:56, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell programming ...] And this all because Gene Heskett was adventurous enough to buy a cheap fake US

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 06:54:58PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then > > explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell > > programming ...] > > And this all because Gene Heskett was adventur

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, Greg Wooledge wrote: > Let me write out the example again, but with the bug fixed, and then > explain what each line does, [... lecture about advanced shell > programming ...] And this all because Gene Heskett was adventurous enough to buy a cheap fake USB disk. :)) Have a nice day :) Thom

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Greg Wooledge wrote: > Shred will determine the size of the file, then write data to the > file, rewind, write data again, etc. On a traditional hard drive, > that will overwrite the original private information. On modern > devices, it may not. Thanks for the excellent explanation :) One nit

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 09:35:11AM -0600, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > > > unlikely that anyone is goi

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue 13 Feb 2024 at 07:15:48 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > > unlikely that anyone is going to use >&1 in the manner of the example. > > Standard output means

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, "info shred" says: > > > i=$(mktemp) > > > exec 3<>"$i" > > > rm -- "$i" > > > echo "Hello, world" >&3 > > > shred - >&3 > > > exec 3>- Greg Wooledge wrote: > In fact, that last line is > written incorrectly. It should say "exec 3>&-" and what that does >

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:36:14AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:15:48AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > This is an obvious bug in the info page. I wonder how many years > > this has gone unnoticed. > > I've filed Bug#1063837 for it.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 07:15:48AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > This is an obvious bug in the info page. I wonder how many years > this has gone unnoticed. I've filed Bug#1063837 for it.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:01:47PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > … but not much. For me, "standard output" is /dev/fd/1, yet it seems > unlikely that anyone is going to use >&1 in the manner of the example. Standard output means "whatever file descriptor 1 points to". That could be a file, a pipe,

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:07:45PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_is_a_file > > But, there is more than one kind of file. > > "All files are equal. > But some files are more equal than others." > > (George Orwell in his dystopic novel "Server F

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:16:00 (-0600), David Wright wrote: > On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:54:24 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > Still there's the discrepancy between doc and behaviour. > > > > There isn't. The documentation sa

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 12/02/2024 05:41, David Christensen wrote: Apparently, shred(1) has both an info(1) page (?) and a man(1) page. The obvious solution is to write one document that is complete and correct, and use it everywhere -- e.g. DRY. https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Man-Pages.html 6.9 Ma

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_is_a_file > But, there is more than one kind of file. "All files are equal. But some files are more equal than others." (George Orwell in his dystopic novel "Server Farm".) Have a nice day :) Thomas

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/12/24 08:50, Curt wrote: On 2024-02-11, wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] If FILE is -, shred standard output. =20 In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there which says "you can operate on a non-file". Point

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 04:50:50PM -, Curt wrote: > On 2024-02-11, wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >>If FILE is -, shred standard output. > >>=20 > >> In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in th

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2024-02-11, wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > [...] > >>If FILE is -, shred standard output. >>=20 >> In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there >> which says "you can operate on a non-file". > > Point taken, yes.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/11/24 06:54, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fas

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun 11 Feb 2024 at 09:54:24 (-0500), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > Wha

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

Hi, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Still there's the discrepancy between doc and behaviour. Depends at which documentation you look. Obviously stemming from https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=155175#36 i read in https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/shred-invocatio

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:54:24AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] >If FILE is -, shred standard output. > > In every sentence, the word FILE appears. There's nothing in there > which says "you can operate on a non-file". Point taken, yes. Cheers -- t signature.asc Description: P

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 03:45:21PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > [...] > > > > What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number > > > gener

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 09:37:31AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: [...] > > What Thomas was trying to do is to get a cheap, fast random number > > generator. Shred seems to have such. > > Well... I certainly wouldn't call it a bug.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:02:12AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 07:10:54PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > > > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > > > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > > > shred: -: invalid

Re: shred bug?

Hi, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > Maybe it is unstated but mandatory to use -n 1 as well? > And optionally -s N? Naw. It just doesn't want to work pipes. Initially i tried with these options: shred -n 1 -s 1K -v - | sha256sum as preparation for a proposal to Gene Heskett, like: shred

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

David Christensen wrote: > On 2/10/24 16:10, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > >> 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > >> $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > >> shred: -: invalid file type > >> 0 > >> > >> > >> It looks like a shred(1) needs a

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 07:10:54PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > > shred: -: invalid file type > > 0 > > > > > > It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report.

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/10/24 16:10, Greg Wooledge wrote: On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c shred: -: invalid file type 0 It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report. I'm confused what you expected this command to do

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 04:05:21PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > 2024-02-10 16:03:50 dpchrist@laalaa ~ > $ shred -s 1K - | wc -c > shred: -: invalid file type > 0 > > > It looks like a shred(1) needs a bug report. I'm confused what you expected this command to do. You wanted to "destroy" (b

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On 2/10/24 04:40, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: [...] But shred(1) on Debian 11 refuses on "-" contrary to its documentation: shred: -: invalid file type A non-existing file path causes "No such file or directory". Hmm. This looks

Re: shred bug?

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 02:58:06PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Hi, > > to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > Ah, it seems to be this one, from 2002: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=155175 > > So it's not a bug but a feature. :( > > I'm riddling over the code about the connection

Re: shred bug?

Hi, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Ah, it seems to be this one, from 2002: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=155175 So it's not a bug but a feature. :( I'm riddling over the code about the connection to an old graphics algorithm (Bresenham's Algorithm) and how shred produces a rand

Re: shred bug?

On 2/10/24 08:32, Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, i wrote: shred: -: invalid file type to...@tuxteam.de wrote: Hmm. This looks like a genuine bug: the man page mentions it. Even the help text in https://sources.debian.org/src/coreutils/9.4-3/src/shred.c/ says If FILE is -, shred standar

Re: shred bug?

Hi, i wrote: > > shred: -: invalid file type to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > Hmm. This looks like a genuine bug: the man page mentions it. Even the help text in https://sources.debian.org/src/coreutils/9.4-3/src/shred.c/ says If FILE is -, shred standard output. The name "-" is recognized in li

Re: shred bug? [was: Unidentified subject!]

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 01:40:35PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 11:38:21AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > [...] > > > But shred(1) on Debian 11 refuses on "-" contrary to its documentation: > > shred: -: invalid file type > > A non-existing file path causes "No suc

Re: Shred Iterations

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/18/07 00:08, Masatran, R. Deepak wrote: > Why does shred have multiple iterations (25) as the default option? I see no > point in overwriting more than once. Is not > > sudo shred --iterations=1 --verbose /dev/sda > > sufficient? No. If i

Re: Shred Iterations

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/18/07 00:13, Tyler MacDonald wrote: > Masatran, R. Deepak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Why does shred have multiple iterations (25) as the default option? I see no >> point in overwriting more than once. Is not >> >> sudo shred --iterations=

Re: Shred Iterations

Masatran, R. Deepak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why does shred have multiple iterations (25) as the default option? I see no > point in overwriting more than once. Is not > > sudo shred --iterations=1 --verbose /dev/sda > > sufficient? Not if you *REALLY* want to get rid of something.. the

Re: shred

on Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:17:50PM -0600, Rick Macdonald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Martin F. Krafft wrote: > > > also sprach harsha (on Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:10:46AM +0530): > > > There is this option of shreding of a file in KDE What exactly does it do? > > > The progress b

Re: shred

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Martin F. Krafft wrote: > also sprach harsha (on Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:10:46AM +0530): > > There is this option of shreding of a file in KDE What exactly does it do? > > The progress bar shows making 36 passes if I delete about 150k file. > > it most likely overwrites the file

Re: shred

man shred. It's a secure rm, overwriting with zeros and other stuff... On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, harsha wrote: > >Hi, > >There is this option of shreding of a file in KDE What exactly does it do? >The progress bar shows making 35 passes if I delete about 150k file. > >regards >harsha > > > > -- Ga

Re: shred

also sprach harsha (on Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:10:46AM +0530): > There is this option of shreding of a file in KDE What exactly does it do? > The progress bar shows making 36 passes if I delete about 150k file. it most likely overwrites the file several times with alternating patterns of 0's and 1's