Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: Michael Johnson <a@xxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:23:07 -0400
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:26:17 -0500, "Ken from Chicago"
<kwicker1b_nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just write over the data with the same filenames.
Hah. It doesn't work that way. If you can imagine a desk full of
manila folders.. each with a tag that has a name on it.. does removing
the tag from one folder and placing it on another folder get rid of
the original folders documents? All that happens when you save another
file with the same name is the new file gets the new name and the old
one basically gets deleted by losing its old name and having its space
made available to write upon. There is no guarantee and a great
likelihood that the deleted data will stay on the drive for a good
period of time.
I meant what I said, write over the DATA with the same filenames, not save a
file with the same name.
Maybe I'm just being a bit daft.. but I don't really understand what
you mean by that sentence. The only way you're ensuring you are
actually altering actual file data is having a program that walks
through the sectors and bytes altering the physical data of the file.
Most normal programs, including windows explorer do not typically do
that. For example.. lets say you opened your resume in notepad and
copy and pasted a couple megs worth of 'resume.txt' over the data and
hit save. Gone.. right? Not really because the sectors of your drive
that contain all those resume.txt's are just reassigned to the old
filename while the no longer used sectors are returned to the system,
while the data they contained is still intact. Your system tries to
follow the path of least resistence and the shortest method to
accomplish a task.. not necessarily the way you perceive it.
If the drive is not full--which I assumed it was
Why on earth would it be full? Assuming that makes no sense
whatsoever.
but that was my bad--save another file as big as whatever remaining space
there is.
All of the machinations taken to do this can be replaced by simply
buying the program I listed or something like it. They will both
delete files so they're gone.. or pave over all unallocated sectors to
ensure previously deleted data is completely gone.
The simplest way would probably be to record live tv onto the hard
drive. That's very memory intensive.
And needless. Just buy the bloody program rather than trying to get
cute. KISS
Basically.. you need a special program that when it deletes the
files.. instead of just deleting the file name and returning the space
back to the computer for future use that it iterates through every
single sector and byte that the file comprises and writes over it 3
times with different data. Only then is it considered to be gone. Its
a much slower process and takes time which is why your delete function
doesn't normally use it. Back in the day Norton's Wipeinfo program
used to be preferred method of choice when you absolutely, positively
had to have the files gone before the FBI knocked your door down.
Easier just to erase the root directory and all subdirectories, including
hidden ones and save a file as big as the hard drive itself--altho every
year that gets harder as hard drives increase in size. If there is no empty
space left then the old data has to be written over.
Well.. if you're gonna nuke it from orbit.. the only way to be sure
why not go the full nine yards and low-level format the drive? Haven't
checked but Partition Magic I would think would have features to do
just that.
The absolute kneeslapper of the episode was Bellick ready and willing
to head to Utah. Sorry.. but no. As a correctional officer and someone
knowledgable with how the system works why would he take a chance of
getting an aiding and abetting charge? Once he's got them in his
control if he gets them back to town thats a for sure couple hundred
thousand, plenty of 'severance pay', and can thumb his nose at the FBI
for having done what they couldn't.
It's a gamble. He goes for the 5-million payday, and if the cops catch him,
he claims he caught Scofield and Burrows for the money.
It still doesn't make much sense not to go for the sure money. Not to
mention there are like 4 other guys he can go after still.
Also.. considering that the hispanic guy that Bellick interrogated
heard everything the old guy said along with Scoffield.. there really
shouldn't be anything extra that Bellick doesn't know.
-MJ
Bellick didn't know if Sucre's cousin(brother?) was lying. Besides, Scofield
didn't spill HOW they were gonna get to Utah.
Once he had them it didn't matter.. drive them to the local sheriff's
station and he can blow money to spend months in Utah looking for the
cash while waiting for the reward to come through... without their
interference. The fact is there is nothing he can learn from them and
they're only a liability in the quest for the cash if he's going after
it.
-MJ
.
- References:
- "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: GarondoMarondo
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: GarondoMarondo
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: jayembee
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: BTR1701
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: Jonathan Roberts
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: Ken from Chicago
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: Michael Johnson
- Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- From: Ken from Chicago
- "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- Prev by Date: Re: Shades of Jenny Jones: II?: Nancy Grace - talk show host responsible for guest's death?
- Next by Date: Re: Studio 60's Amanda Peet is pregnant
- Previous by thread: Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- Next by thread: Re: "Prison Break" 9/11First Down (Spoiler)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|