 rcdaileyDragoonflyPremium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA | reply to Blackbird
Re: Adam Lanzas hard drive I'm sure someone will want to know the Lanza method of data destruction if it really does prevent forensic recovery.
--
It is easier for a camel to put on a bikini than an old man to thread a needle. |
|
|
|
 StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
 ·CenturyLink
1 edit | Of course.
Let's say the HD was damaged but not destroyed (e.g. the HD was hit by a hammer but the HD platters are ok). Does that mean that he was a) incompetent in his attempts. b) attempting to leave a message while making it appear as though not (for some crazy reason)?
On the other hand if the HD was effectively destroyed does that mean there was something worthwhile on it?
We can never be 100% sure in either case. His brains (deliberately) were splattered on a classroom floor and his mothers' were also blown out. In short the two people that probably knew are gone.
IMO all the opinions on TV may be great for ratings etc but I doubt we'll ever know the full story even if there is one.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
| reply to rcdailey
said by rcdailey:I'm sure someone will want to know the Lanza method of data destruction if it really does prevent forensic recovery.
With today's data density physical destruction of the platters will ensure data recovery is hard or impossible. In a HD like the Challenger's (400MB) you have 400MB of data spread across 2 platters. Think if it like grains of sand. Now in a modern 2TB drive, you have, what 5200x more data in the same area. So those grains of sand now become 5200x smaller. So if you take out, say a 1/16th of an inch, in a 400MB drive you may have wiped out a few MB of data. On a 2TB drive, you could have wiped out a couple GB. |
|
