Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Ah, blame tennis, my favorite game!

Is there an alternative non-optional strategy for achieving secure delete (or revocation semantics of some kind)? If not, this is a fundamental capability that you can't paper over by slapping an abstraction layer on top any more than you could turn a 1TB HDD into a 2TB HDD with an abstraction layer. If so, it seems to me like the bug is very much in the hard drive / standards, not in the operating system.



> Is there an alternative non-optional strategy for achieving secure delete

Issue normal data writes of blocks that are filled with zeros. The same way regular data makes it to the drive just fine will also of course work for data that's all zeros.


Oh, so WRITE SAME doesn't come with "no wear leveling" semantics? That makes emulation much more reasonable.


I think the only way to get "no wear leveling" is the ATA Secure Erase command. Which you only need for devices that do wear leveling in the first place which the drive in question doesn't anyway so it's a bit moot.


Would that work on a filesystem that supports sparse files?


We're talking about the filesystem driver itself issuing the write.

The above is a discussion about whether the filesystem driver or the block device driver would issue the SCSI commands.

This would never happen from userspace.


Why would you need to overwrite blocks of a sparse file? Which blocks would you be overwriting?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: