Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 04:47:12 +0200 From: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Mike Jeays <Mike.Jeays@rogers.com>, Danny MacMillan <flowers@users.sourceforge.net>, Sebastian Pahlke <sp.ibm@gmx.de> Subject: Re: dd is so slow on my SCSI disc Message-ID: <200508230447.29368@harrymail> In-Reply-To: <1124764156.95639.3.camel@chaucer> References: <007301c5a755$ea1ee840$6701a8c0@monster> <430A7496.6080206@users.sourceforge.net> <1124764156.95639.3.camel@chaucer>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart4399887.PfaIUT8fxC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Dienstag, 23. August 2005 04:29 CEST schrieb Mike Jeays: > On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 20:57, Danny MacMillan wrote: > > Sebastian Pahlke wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm trying to "clean" a disc before selling them: > > > > > > dd if=3D/dev/zero of=3D/dev/da0 > > > > You may want to consider using /dev/random instead of, or in > > combination with, /dev/zero. Zeroing out a disk isn't a significant > > barrier to forensic analysis. > > [...] > > Using /dev/random is much, much slower than /dev/zero. > He quoted correctly and his statment wasn't about speed, but about the=20 purpose of the original action; To "clean" discs before selling.... I'm not sure if single-writing nulls or randoms makes any difference; I=20 think it doesn't, but his post wasn't incorrect! =2DHarry --nextPart4399887.PfaIUT8fxC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBDCo5BBylq0S4AzzwRAiH6AJ9nRNs6iwhbtK3b+gErH9bB5K9cgACePUKK Twl4yjcmFzaYIiHeYdnfT7U= =9fMQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4399887.PfaIUT8fxC--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508230447.29368>