# Web site visitor tracking - Page 5

•  Subject
• Author
• Posted on

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Rod Speed wrote:

Rod,

I see you really don't understand the electronics behind this.

To start - my background is a double major in Electrical Engineering and
engineer to digital design - including 13 years with IBM, five of them
on the hardware side.  Even though I've been in software for the past
few years, I've kept up with the hardware end and maintain my
proficiency therein.

With that in mind - let me fill you in on some basics.  Magnetic media
such as hard disks are NOT digital devices.  They are analog devices.
When you write to a disk, you are changing the magnetic flux on a very
small spot.  However, this is an analog flux - it has a relative
strength, not an absolute one.  When the disk controller reads the spot,
the controller determines whether the spot represents a 0 or a 1,
depending on the polarity of the bit.

However - as I said, this is not digital.  For instance, the magnetic
flux of the spot may have an (arbitrary) value of -100 to +100 (-100 is
100 units "North pole" and +100 is 100 units "South pole").

Say the disk is clean (nothing at all on it).  If you write a "0", you
might get a strength of -90.  When the disk controller reads this, it
will say "that's less than my (arbitrary) 0, so it must be a '0'.

Now - lets say you rewrite this with another 0.  Now you might get a
magnetic flux of -91.  Still < 0, so it's still represents a '0' bit.

Now, go back and write a '1' there (instead of a second 0).  You might
get a flux value of +88 instead of the +90 you'd get if it were a new
disk, due to the residual magnetism from the first '0' bit.  It's still
a '1' because the flux value is > 0.  But it's not the same as if you
had written a single '1' bit (+90) or two '1' bits (+91).

So, what's this got to do with everything?  Very simple.  The controller
is doing the conversion.  Get rid of the digital controller and replace
it with a very sensitive analog one.  Take the output of the analog
controller and run it through some very sophisticated signal processing
algorithms.  Not only can you read the current contents of the drive,
but you can read the previous "layer".  And the one before that.  And
the one before that.

In fact, depending on your equipment (and budget), you can recover
several layers of data from that disk.  It's why all secure government
systems must have their disks physically destroyed (burned) instead of
erase/reformatted.

have a chance to erase your data.  The first thing I would do is pull
the power plug - not try to sign on.  Then I'd remove your disk and
place it in my own system with my own controller.  That way I control
what the disk can and can't do.

There is NO perfectly secure system!

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

We'll see...

I've done a lot more than that thanks.

I've been doing that for a hell a lot longer than you have, thanks.

And I have designed and implemented magnetic media too thanks.

You didnt.

Duh.

Duh.

That is never the situation with a hard drive in the real world.

That is utterly mangled with real world hard drives.

Nope.

Pig ignorant lie. And you can obviously never get back very far anyway.

Pig ignorant lie.

Have fun explaining the DOD-5220 Standard
of the US Department of Defense

Wrong again when its been encrypted and setup to erase the
data if the code hasnt been entered when expected, to ensure
that even holding a gun to the head of the individual who has
the code wont allow the encryption to be compromised.

Wrong again.

You can keep chanting that pathetic little pig ignorant mantra till
the cows come home if you like, doesnt change a damned thing.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Rod Speed wrote:

Your lack of knowledge on the subject indicates otherwise.

So does your lack of vocabulary and inability to carry on a coherent
conversation.

Maybe if you keep repeating your "Pig Ignorant Lies" mantra you might
start to believe it.

Oh, wait - you already do!

I doubt it.  My electronics goes back to 1963.  Programming to 1967.

If you had, you'd understand the process.

That is exactly the case when the disk is first created.  Until someone
performs a low level format on the disk, it is clean.

If you had designed magnetic media, you'd understand this.

Then how can the U.S. government recover data which has been erased and
written over?  And they CAN do it!

Again - magnetic material is analog.  The computer is digital.  There
has to be a conversion from one to the other someplace.  And it is in
the controller.

If you had really designed magnetic media, you'd be aware of this.

People have been able to go back at least 7 layers for years.  There are
rumors that the Federal Government can go back > 30 layers.  But that's
also top secret, so there's no telling exactly how far they can go back.

Have you actually read DOD-5220?  Or just seen it on the internet?

5-705. Methods of Destruction.  Classified materials may be destroyed by
burning, shredding, pulping, melting, mutilation, chemical decomposition
or pulverizing (for example, hammer mills, choppers, and hybridized
disintegration equipment.  (It continues on in more detail).

8-301. Clearing and Sanitization.  Instructions on clearing,
sanitization and release of IS media shall be issued by the accrediting CSA.

Nowhere in this document does it allow for multiple erasures before
releasing a hard disk or other media containing classified material.

Actually, disk drive encryption is typically not that hard to break.
Most encryption routines used for storing on the hard drive are known as
weak encryption methods.  This is because of the amount of
reading/writing being done to the disk - strong encryption takes a lot
of CPU time. Additionally, U.S. export restrictions on encryption
software prevent any company from implementing strong encryption mechanisms.

Every encryption method I know of (even those found on the Internet)
which are currently in use in the public sector use weak encryption.  It
make take the resources of the NSA to do it, but it can be decrypted.

As for erasing the data - no chance if I take the disk out of your
computer and install it in another.  I can then read your disk (although
it may be encrypted) because I'm not using your software.  And if I
really wanted to be sure, it's a minor matter to disable the write
hardware on the disk.  Then it *can't* be written.  Or just take out the
controller and replace with my own.

You really don't understand, do you?  How is your disk going to erase
the data without power?  And if it's my controller, *I* control the read
and write.

And you can just keep your delusions.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Easy to claim, wanker.

Even you should be able to manage better than that pathetically hoary old line.

Obviously not.

<reams of even more puerile shit any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Guess which posturing prat has just got egg all over its pathetic little face ?

I do thanks.

Irrelevant to the situation once its in the hands of the user.

You quite sure you aint one of those rocket
scientist pig ignorant posturing fuckwits ?

Duh.

Not when its been repeatedly written over with varying patterns they cant.

Not when its been repeatedly written over with varying patterns they cant.

It aint 'conversion'

Neither is very far, stupid.

And there is obviously a real incentive to
claim much more than they can do too.

Only fools like you are so stupid that you cant grasp that.

Thats flagrantly dishonest about the situation being discussed.

Lie.

Never said a word about disk drive encryption.

Never said a word about disk drive encryption.

Lie.

Lie when its properly encrypted.

Wrong again with a system thats designed to
set fire to the drive when intrusion is detected.

Not if its gone up in flames it cant!!

And you wont get past decent encryption anyway.

And you wont necessarily even be able to work out
where the encryted data is anyway to even attempt that.

No need to ask you if you could bullshit your way out of a wet paper
bag if your pathetic excuse for a 'life' depended on it. Obviously not.

Set fire to the drive would do that fine.

Pity you dont get to use your controller.

Pity that even if the drive isnt erased, you wont be able
to get what is properly encrypted and hidden so you
cant even work out what is the encrypted data either.

Taint a delusion, its fact, wanker.

Keep desperately digging, you'll be out in china any day now.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

I am convinced he has just seen a reference to it on the internet. I suspect
poor roddy has skimmed over some of the subject headings (at best) and now
thinks its a "cool thing" to reference during the debate. He is blissfully
unaware it disproves his case repeatedly.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Actually I have read the document and I still have no idea why you brought
it up.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Is there a reason why most government organisations wont allow hard disks
they have to be totally destroyed if it is so trivial to "completely erase"
the relevant data.

By the way, do you see the difference between "secure" and "destroyed"?

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

That is a lie.

Just mindless pig ignorant paranoia and the
fact that it aint their money being wasted.

There's a reason that incompetant fools end up as shinybums.

Keep desperately digging, you'll be out in china any day now.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

No it isn't. I spent several years working for the UK government making sure
they were never (knowingly) reused.

Now you see, that is a lie.

Repetitive and boring. Come up with something new.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Yes it is.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that the UK
govt is a fart in the bath as far as most govt orgs are concerned.

Nope.

And you have just proved that in spades.

Go and fuck yourself, you stupid pig ignorant pommy fuckwit.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

And lo, Rod Speed didst speak in
alt.websites,alt.www.webmaster,aus.computers:

"This isn't an argument!  It's merely contradiction!"

"No it isn't!"

"See?  You're doing it again!"

Grey

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Some terminal fuckwit claiming to be
just the puerile shit thats all it can ever manage.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

begin  And lo, Rod Speed didst speak in
alt.websites,alt.www.webmaster,aus.computers:

Pathetic, really.

Grey

--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollory that nothing is ridiculous.
- http://www.greywyvern.com/orca#ring - Orca Ringmaker: Host a webring

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Oh no it isnt.

(This could go on for some time. You are wrong but as you have the mental
age of a 2 year old you will never give in and think this is a reasonable
way to debate...)

Wonder when the "He's behind you" will come out.

How is that relevant? Even if they are a fart in the bath, then surely the
more powerful governments will implement stricter regimes.

I know the US Government has a similar policy.

It really is.

I dont disagree. I am not a "shinybum" therefore you define me as !=
incompetant. I can live with that.

In fact, even if you do call me incompetant I am not going to lose any sleep
over it.

Nice one. I like it.

You still don't know the difference between "secure" and "destroyed" though.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Yes, however I have never found a bank which claims its systems are 100%
secure.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Pity I never ever said that any of them are.

Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 04:21:55 +1000, in message
world  :

Are you tilting at windmills now?

--
T Wake
05/10/2005 19:25:20

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

Yep, in another post of yours.

Nope.

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 05:19:53 +1000, in message
world  :

Well, if I did then it was a mistake of mine. I was working on the
assumption you had said it was possible to make "a" (unspecified) system
100% secure.

Good.

--
T Wake
05/10/2005 20:55:13

## Re: Web site visitor tracking

The scenario being discussed was obvious from the context.

You ignored the context ?  Your problem.