[19836] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: CD shredders, was Re: thoughts on one time pads
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Korn)
Thu Feb 2 17:43:44 2006
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: "Dave Korn" <davek_throwaway@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 19:39:52 -0000
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
Travis H. wrote:
> On 1/28/06, dan@geer.org <dan@geer.org> wrote:
>> In our office, we have a shredder that happily
>> takes CDs and is designed to do so. It is noisy
>> and cost >$500.
>
> Here's one for $40, although it doesn't appear to "shred" them so much
> as make them pitted:
>
> http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/security/6d7f/
The review doesn't exactly inspire confidence. They say the disk is
"pitted"? Isn't that just another way of saying that the machine does only
minor surface damage to the protective plastic coating, and doesn't harm the
fine metallic layer in the center of the disc where the actual information
is? And in that case, shouldn't you be able to recover the data with one of
those cheap CD-polish-and-repair kits?
I can't the point of paying for a machine that damages the disk _less_
than you could do by snapping it in half with your bare hands. That seems
to me to be a very major false economy: a shredder that doesn't shred is
just /not/ an improvement on one that does, no matter *how* much cheaper it
is.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
