Originally posted by: RichUK
Originally posted by: Oyeve
Originally posted by: cisco911
Someone told me that a strong magent would work. Anybody know?
No,
as some of the worlds strongest magnets are already IN hard drives. Use DBAN.
i second that, the magnet is used for the movement of the arm accross the platters .. back in my college days we took one apart .. and o my god i had to pick the magnet off with a screw driver and some real force that thing was solid.. i have never seen somthing that powerfull (well magnet wise anyway) before ..
True, there is a magnet right in there near the platters. However, those of you who have played around with these magnets may know that the magnetic field from them is very strong only when you are very close to only the flat faces of the magnets. The fields to the sides are practically nonexistant - and that's where the platters lie. So the field never reaches the platters in any appreciable amount.
Hold one of these very same magnets directly over the platters, and you'll not be getting any more use out of the drive.
Now then, the options for erasing the drive without destroying it:
If doing this from Windows, use
Eraser.
Eraser also allows you to make a
DBAN boot disk, for drive wiping from a command prompt.
Note that REALLY securely erasing data can take days, as the most secure method, the Gutmann Method, involves 35 passes over the entire disc. I'll usually just do a pass of pseudorandom data, followed by a zero-write pass.
Of course, I'm just now reading at the
DBAN FAQ some new information:
Q: Is the Gutmann method the best method?
A: No.
Most of the passes in the Gutmann wipe are designed to flip the bits in MFM/RLL encoded disks, which is an encoding that modern hard disks do not use.
In a followup to his paper, Gutmann said that it is unnecessary to run those passes because you cannot be reasonably certain about how a modern hard disk stores data on the platter. If the encoding is unknown, then writing random patterns is your best strategy.
In particular, Gutmann says that "in the time since this paper was published, some people have treated the 35-pass overwrite technique described in it more as a kind of voodoo incantation to banish evil spirits than the result of a technical analysis of drive encoding techniques. As a result, they advocate applying the voodoo to PRML and EPRML drives even though it will have no more effect than a simple scrubbing with random data... For any modern PRML/EPRML drive, a few passes of random scrubbing is the best you can do".
I can't say I know what any of those acronyms mean, but it sounds like the 2-pass way I described might be adequate for modern drives.