One option would be to use, say, AES in counter mode with a key gotten from
Still not trustworthy unless you trust the secure erase. I don't.
Unless it is a report digitally signed by a secure erase device, that report is worth about as much as a person certifying the erasure.
By "modern disk" I mean "disk", not "disk emulator" (what an SSD essentially is), of course.
For an SSD, if you want an "eBay safe" erase, just do the zeroing. Some expensive data-recovery software may still recover buffers and the like. If you need more, do physical destruction. You cannot really trust that the ATA "Secure Erase" command does what it claims.
But the whole discussion here is not about disks with any really high-value data on them. For those, always do full zeroing, ATA Secure Erase (if an SSD) and then physical destruction. For those disks the small amount of money a sale can recover is not even worth the additional effort.
That already qualifies as a number of hoops for the average user, and that is the problem. Apparently, even googeling "erase disk" is far too complicated for the average user. Of course, you and me will have that Linux boot CD/DVD/USB-key already laying around, but the average user is apparently so limited that companies like Blancco make good business on something that is easy to do with free tools.
DBAN is nice though. Had not heard of it before.
You can do that if you do not mind it taking much longer.
Was about to post that. For a nice progress indicator, use
Apparently, a single zero-overwrite is entirely enough for modern disks (say, newer than 15 years or so), as these are used close enough to the surface data density limit that even magnetic force microscopy can recover a few scattered bits at best after a zero-wipe.
I think the main problem here is that to do something like this under Windows, you have to jump through some hoops. And the other main problem is (of course) that people do not understand how disk storage works in the first place.
Aehm, do you know what an endoscope is?
Well, "nonlinear classificator" or "planning algorithm", or the like is not suitable for modern "journalism" as it does usually not inspire awe or fear. And that is all these people seem to be aiming for these days.
It is just stupid journalism: "game-changer" "breakthrough" "revolutionary" "unheard of" bullshit. Apparently, the masses like it that way.
Indeed. This is about making better lens-systems at the end of an endoscope. The camera sits at the other end of the fiber.
This is a lens-system at the end of an optical fiber. The actual camera is a the other end of that fiber. The paper-title gets it right: "Two-photon direct laser writing of ultracompact multi-lens objectives". There is nothing "injectable" here and no "surveillance concerns" either. This is a better endoscope, and that is it. As such it is very interesting, no doubt. But the add-on concerns and fear-mongering are complete bullshit.
My guess is that they make these additional statements by some algorithm that is completely stupid. The link here seems to be copyright.