search for: blogview

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "blogview".

Did you mean: logview
2017 May 31
2
CentOS 6.9, shredding a RAID
John R Pierce wrote: > On 5/31/2017 8:04 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> I've got an old RAID that I attached to a box. LSI card, and the RAID >> has 12 drives, for a total RAID size of 9.1TB, I think. I started shred >> /dev/sda the Friday before last... and it's still running. Is this >> reasonable for it to be taking this long...? > > not at all
2017 May 31
0
CentOS 6.9, shredding a RAID
...f the drive(s). the DoD multipass erase procedure is long obsolete and deprecated. It was based on MFM and RLL technology prevalent in the mid 1980s. NISPOM 2006-5220 replaced it in 2006, and says "DESTROY CONFIDENTIAL/SECRET INFORMATION PHYSICALLY". http://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/16130-The-Urban-Legend-of-Multipass-Hard-Disk-Overwrite.html http://www.dss.mil/documents/odaa/nispom2006-5220.pdf from that blog,... > Fortunately, several security researchers presented a paper [WRIG08 > <http://www.springerlink.com/content/408263ql11460147/>] at the Fourth > I...
2017 May 31
3
CentOS 6.9, shredding a RAID
...DoD multipass erase procedure is long obsolete and deprecated. It > was based on MFM and RLL technology prevalent in the mid 1980s. NISPOM > 2006-5220 replaced it in 2006, and says "DESTROY CONFIDENTIAL/SECRET > INFORMATION PHYSICALLY". > > http://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/16130-The-Urban-Legend-of-Multipass-Hard-Disk-Overwrite.html > http://www.dss.mil/documents/odaa/nispom2006-5220.pdf > > from that blog,... > >> Fortunately, several security researchers presented a paper [WRIG08 >> <http://www.springerlink.com/content/408263ql11460147/&g...
2005 Oct 17
7
Ajax.MultiUpdater ?
Hi, I''m using prototype within ruby on rails. One limitation I''d like to overcome is the restriction of beeing able to update just one html elements content using from_remote_tag or link_to_remote. AFAICS this is just a restriction of the form_remote_tag/link_to_remote implementation and it''s underlying Ajax.Updater class. Right? In theorie there should be no problem,