|
From: | GNU bug Tracking System |
Subject: | bug#38168: closed (shred vs. SSD) |
Date: | Tue, 12 Nov 2019 01:02:02 +0000 |
Your message dated Mon, 11 Nov 2019 17:01:07 -0800 with message-id <address@hidden> and subject line Re: bug#38168: shred vs. SSD has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #38168, regarding shred vs. SSD to be marked as done. (If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact address@hidden.) -- 38168: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38168 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message ---Subject: shred vs. SSD Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:36:12 +0100 Hi, shred's man and info pages devote several paragraphs to explain "a very important assumption: that the file system overwrites data in place." However, they don't mention that the underlying storage also has to meet this criterium. In particular, today's widely used SSD drives are known to perform wear leveling, i.e. rearrange the blocks as they please. I think shred's documentation should devote a section to storage media, too. (On a side note, the man and info pages are slightly out of sync. E.g. the info page mentions BFS and NTFS as journaling file systems, the man page doesn't.) thanks a lot, egmont
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Subject: Re: bug#38168: shred vs. SSD Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 17:01:07 -0800 Thanks for mentioning this. I installed the attached patch to fix the problems that you mentioned, except that I didn't add a section on storage media, data remanence, and data forensics (partly because a lot of this stuff is secret). User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 If someone would like to contribute text in that area, it would be a good thing to have (if only to discourage even more users from using 'shred' :-). In the meantime I'll take the liberty of closing the bug report.0001-shred-modernize-documentation.patch
Description: Text Data
--- End Message ---
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |