It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

On 8/12/15 12:08 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Bull****.
You can easily "purge" a hard drive with system software or with
inexpensive third party software.

In article ,
says...

On 8/12/15 12:08 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Bull****.
You can easily "purge" a hard drive with system software or with
inexpensive third party software.

True. She's no doubt successfully "purged" evidence
of her involvement in South American drug-running and
Vince Foster's murder.
But on the plus side, we are spared endless GOP
investigations into her Amazon purchases.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)

On 8/12/2015 12:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)



We are talking Hillary Clinton here, not a computer geek. I am sure that
when she was first asked to hand over the server she didn't hop in the
Clintonmobile and head for Walmart for some hard drive purging software.

That was the point of my comment. If she felt it necessary to attempt
to completely purge the drives of all former data as opposed to simply
"deleting" emails (and therefore making them available for
reconstruction) it would seem that it was very important to her to
destroy the data.

An inspection of the drive (or drives) should reveal how much effort was
made to "erase" them.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:04:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/12/2015 12:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)



We are talking Hillary Clinton here, not a computer geek. I am sure that
when she was first asked to hand over the server she didn't hop in the
Clintonmobile and head for Walmart for some hard drive purging software.

That was the point of my comment. If she felt it necessary to attempt
to completely purge the drives of all former data as opposed to simply
"deleting" emails (and therefore making them available for
reconstruction) it would seem that it was very important to her to
destroy the data.

An inspection of the drive (or drives) should reveal how much effort was
made to "erase" them.


We are talking about Hillary. I bet she never changed a diaper, nor
did she administer that server. She had a geek on the payroll and I
bet that "server" was on several different machines over the years. I
am a junk collector and I am not still running the same hardware as I
was 3 years ago. If Hillary knows anything, it is how to destroy
evidence.
All you need to do is delete the files, then copy what you want to
keep to another machine and destroy the original.

In article devmsatmdp6lp0ag25m94kabul2oq3u7fp@
4ax.com, says...


We are talking about Hillary. I bet she never changed a diaper, nor
did she administer that server. She had a geek on the payroll and I
bet that "server" was on several different machines over the years. I
am a junk collector and I am not still running the same hardware as I
was 3 years ago. If Hillary knows anything, it is how to destroy
evidence.
All you need to do is delete the files, then copy what you want to
keep to another machine and destroy the original.

Having someone else in charge of such things gives
her "plausible deniability."
That's in every master criminal's toolbox.
And of course HRC is a master criminal.

On 8/12/2015 1:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:04:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/12/2015 12:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)



We are talking Hillary Clinton here, not a computer geek. I am sure that
when she was first asked to hand over the server she didn't hop in the
Clintonmobile and head for Walmart for some hard drive purging software.

That was the point of my comment. If she felt it necessary to attempt
to completely purge the drives of all former data as opposed to simply
"deleting" emails (and therefore making them available for
reconstruction) it would seem that it was very important to her to
destroy the data.

An inspection of the drive (or drives) should reveal how much effort was
made to "erase" them.


We are talking about Hillary. I bet she never changed a diaper, nor
did she administer that server. She had a geek on the payroll and I
bet that "server" was on several different machines over the years. I
am a junk collector and I am not still running the same hardware as I
was 3 years ago. If Hillary knows anything, it is how to destroy
evidence.
All you need to do is delete the files, then copy what you want to
keep to another machine and destroy the original.



I am not a tin hat wearing conspiracy follower, nor am I a computer
geek. I just watch the events unfold. Hillary has been very reluctant
to give up emails and/or the drives on the server that they were located
on. She has been dragging her feet on their releases for a long time.
She finally released what she was willing to release due to
the increasing pressure and, low and behold, a random sampling of 40
emails contained not just classified info but *Top Secret* info.

Now it will become a debate as to what the classification of that info
was at the time it was recorded on her server. To me, it matters not.
As Secretary of State Hillary had an obligation to both recognize and
ensure the security of anything related to national security that even
could remotely be considered classified.

Her actions follow a typical Clinton style of slowly leaking the truth
out in a manner that confuses the issue, causes disinterest and
otherwise swings the finger away from them with respect to any mistakes
or wrongdoing.

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 1:39:06 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 8/12/2015 1:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:04:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/12/2015 12:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)



We are talking Hillary Clinton here, not a computer geek. I am sure that
when she was first asked to hand over the server she didn't hop in the
Clintonmobile and head for Walmart for some hard drive purging software.

That was the point of my comment. If she felt it necessary to attempt
to completely purge the drives of all former data as opposed to simply
"deleting" emails (and therefore making them available for
reconstruction) it would seem that it was very important to her to
destroy the data.

An inspection of the drive (or drives) should reveal how much effort was
made to "erase" them.


We are talking about Hillary. I bet she never changed a diaper, nor
did she administer that server. She had a geek on the payroll and I
bet that "server" was on several different machines over the years. I
am a junk collector and I am not still running the same hardware as I
was 3 years ago. If Hillary knows anything, it is how to destroy
evidence.
All you need to do is delete the files, then copy what you want to
keep to another machine and destroy the original.



I am not a tin hat wearing conspiracy follower, nor am I a computer
geek. I just watch the events unfold. Hillary has been very reluctant
to give up emails and/or the drives on the server that they were located
on. She has been dragging her feet on their releases for a long time.
She finally released what she was willing to release due to
the increasing pressure and, low and behold, a random sampling of 40
emails contained not just classified info but *Top Secret* info.

Now it will become a debate as to what the classification of that info
was at the time it was recorded on her server. To me, it matters not.
As Secretary of State Hillary had an obligation to both recognize and
ensure the security of anything related to national security that even
could remotely be considered classified.

Her actions follow a typical Clinton style of slowly leaking the truth
out in a manner that confuses the issue, causes disinterest and
otherwise swings the finger away from them with respect to any mistakes
or wrongdoing.

You're exactly right.

I noticed that the wiki page referenced earlier was edited last month. It wouldn't surprise me if some manufactured claims about the Bush email issue were recently added to give Clinton supporters a place to point to and exclaim, "Bush did it too!". More damage control.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:39:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/12/2015 1:16 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:04:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 8/12/2015 12:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:08:25 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


It will be interesting the hear of the FBI's inspection of Hillary's
hard drive on her server.

She claims she "erased" all remaining data.

If her definition of "erased" simply means deleted, the data is likely
still there and can be easily retrieved.

If the drive has been purged of all data, it suggests it was
professionally done.

If the latter, why?

Why do you think they are even the same hard drives?
Even if they are, it is trivial to actually erase all of the data with
a method that would even prevent NSA from recovering it.
The easiest way is to delete the data, then fill the drive up until it
is full with anything. Rinse repeat 6 or 7 times if you want to get to
the DoD standard.
I could write up a DOS batch file to do this in a minute or two. (Yes
DOS still runs on Windoze)



We are talking Hillary Clinton here, not a computer geek. I am sure that
when she was first asked to hand over the server she didn't hop in the
Clintonmobile and head for Walmart for some hard drive purging software.

That was the point of my comment. If she felt it necessary to attempt
to completely purge the drives of all former data as opposed to simply
"deleting" emails (and therefore making them available for
reconstruction) it would seem that it was very important to her to
destroy the data.

An inspection of the drive (or drives) should reveal how much effort was
made to "erase" them.


We are talking about Hillary. I bet she never changed a diaper, nor
did she administer that server. She had a geek on the payroll and I
bet that "server" was on several different machines over the years. I
am a junk collector and I am not still running the same hardware as I
was 3 years ago. If Hillary knows anything, it is how to destroy
evidence.
All you need to do is delete the files, then copy what you want to
keep to another machine and destroy the original.



I am not a tin hat wearing conspiracy follower, nor am I a computer
geek. I just watch the events unfold. Hillary has been very reluctant
to give up emails and/or the drives on the server that they were located
on. She has been dragging her feet on their releases for a long time.
She finally released what she was willing to release due to
the increasing pressure and, low and behold, a random sampling of 40
emails contained not just classified info but *Top Secret* info.

Now it will become a debate as to what the classification of that info
was at the time it was recorded on her server. To me, it matters not.
As Secretary of State Hillary had an obligation to both recognize and
ensure the security of anything related to national security that even
could remotely be considered classified.

Her actions follow a typical Clinton style of slowly leaking the truth
out in a manner that confuses the issue, causes disinterest and
otherwise swings the finger away from them with respect to any mistakes
or wrongdoing.


In real life, all you have to do to make "erased data" go away is to
keep your drives pretty full, even if it is just copies of your music
library. If there are no unused sectors, there is no ghost data.

Time is your friend. The more times you overwrite these spare sectors,
the less chance that anything could be recovered, even with the most
sophistocated attempts.