Shadow Copies vs Erasing

I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render
the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and
unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?

"Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
news:eCrqG3l$...
> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render the
> concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and unused
> space useless. Any thoughts on this?

This question doesn't make much sense to me.

ss.

????????????

"Daze N. Knights" wrote:

> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render
> the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and
> unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>

Bear with me here. Try to understand the concern being expressed, and if
it actually does not make any sense and should therefore be of no
concern to me or anyone else (which may well be the case), please try to
explain why that is so, in terms that I can understand.

According to
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...hadowcopy.mspx

"Shadow Copy helps you recover a file if you accidentally delete it . .
.. Accidental file deletion or modification is a common cause of data
loss. Windows Vista includes a useful innovation to help you protect
your data: Shadow Copy."

If this is true, then presumably, Shadow Copy could help you recover a
file if you have *intentionally* deleted (or erased) it, as well.

SO, if, after changing and re-saving a private document several times
(thus creating shadow copies of it), one should then erase (overwrite)
the file with the intention of making it (for all practical purposes)
unrecoverable, would the "shadow copies" of the erased file still exist,
and are they potentially recoverable?

Synapse Syndrome wrote:
> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
> news:eCrqG3l$...
>> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render the
>> concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and unused
>> space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>
> This question doesn't make much sense to me.
>
> ss.
>
>

Curiously, the issue of reliably deleting data remains something of an
unsolved problem in computer science - I mean at the theoretical level, let
alone specific product implementations.

I used to think deleting data was pretty straightforward, until I read a
research paper by the distinguished computer scientist, Radia Perlman:
http://research.sun.com/techrep/2005/abstract-140.html
To quote that paper "It is difficult to ensure that data is completely
destroyed".

Dr Perlman works for Sun Microsystems. There might be some equivalent work
at Microsoft research, I don't know. There probably is; it seems like a
general open problem, in present-day comp sci.

RMS ("Rights Management Services") and IRM ("Information Rights Management")
are facilities in the Microsoft environment, to protect data from being
compromised from old document copies. At present, these features are mainly
oriented to the corporate context:
http://technet2.microsoft.com/window...s/default.mspx

--
Andrew McLaren
amclar (at) optusnet dot com dot au

"Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
news:eCrqG3l$...
> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render the
> concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and unused
> space useless. Any thoughts on this?


Put another way, is your question "if I erase a file or directory, does it's
shadow copy still exist?"

Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking...

Lang

Yes. Please see my posting a half-hour previous to your own.

Lang Murphy wrote:
> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
> news:eCrqG3l$...
>> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render
>> the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and
>> unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>
>
> Put another way, is your question "if I erase a file or directory, does
> it's shadow copy still exist?"
>
> Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking...
>
> Lang

"Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
news:OJYCV2m$...
> Yes. Please see my posting a half-hour previous to your own.
>
> Lang Murphy wrote:
>> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
>> news:eCrqG3l$...
>>> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually render
>>> the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory entries, and
>>> unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>>
>>
>> Put another way, is your question "if I erase a file or directory, does
>> it's shadow copy still exist?"
>>
>> Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking...
>>
>> Lang


Yah... your "half hour previous" post wasn't up when I responded...

At any rate, I would think not. I would assume that deleting a file or
folder also removes its shadow copy. That's just a total SWAG, because I
don't know for sure... but that would be my guess. Otherwise, how would
shadow copies be cleaned up? I guess there could be a process that runs and
checks to see if the original file/folder exists and if it doesn't, then
remove the shadow copies, but that seems bass-ackward to me... I'd put my
money on the shadow copies being deleted when the original file is deleted.

Lang

Thanks for your guess, but I'm just guessing, too, and I was hoping
someone here might have a definitive answer. Of course, shadow copies
being "deleted" when the original file is deleted does not amount to the
same thing as shadow copies being "erased" (overwritten) when the
original is erased . . .

Lang Murphy wrote:
> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
> news:OJYCV2m$...
>> Yes. Please see my posting a half-hour previous to your own.
>>
>> Lang Murphy wrote:
>>> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
>>> news:eCrqG3l$...
>>>> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually
>>>> render the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory
>>>> entries, and unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>>>
>>>
>>> Put another way, is your question "if I erase a file or directory,
>>> does it's shadow copy still exist?"
>>>
>>> Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking...
>>>
>>> Lang
>
>
> Yah... your "half hour previous" post wasn't up when I responded...
>
> At any rate, I would think not. I would assume that deleting a file or
> folder also removes its shadow copy. That's just a total SWAG, because I
> don't know for sure... but that would be my guess. Otherwise, how would
> shadow copies be cleaned up? I guess there could be a process that runs
> and checks to see if the original file/folder exists and if it doesn't,
> then remove the shadow copies, but that seems bass-ackward to me... I'd
> put my money on the shadow copies being deleted when the original file
> is deleted.
>
> Lang

Where have you been?


-Michael

* Daze N. Knights:
> Thanks for your guess, but I'm just guessing, too, and I was hoping
> someone here might have a definitive answer. Of course, shadow copies
> being "deleted" when the original file is deleted does not amount to the
> same thing as shadow copies being "erased" (overwritten) when the
> original is erased . . .
>
> Lang Murphy wrote:
>> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
>> news:OJYCV2m$...
>>> Yes. Please see my posting a half-hour previous to your own.
>>>
>>> Lang Murphy wrote:
>>>> "Daze N. Knights" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:eCrqG3l$...
>>>>> I've wondered if Vista's saving of shadow copies might actually
>>>>> render the concept of erasing (overwriting) files, directory
>>>>> entries, and unused space useless. Any thoughts on this?
>>>>
>>>> Put another way, is your question "if I erase a file or directory,
>>>> does it's shadow copy still exist?"
>>>>
>>>> Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking...
>>>>
>>>> Lang
>>
>> Yah... your "half hour previous" post wasn't up when I responded...
>>
>> At any rate, I would think not. I would assume that deleting a file or
>> folder also removes its shadow copy. That's just a total SWAG, because I
>> don't know for sure... but that would be my guess. Otherwise, how would
>> shadow copies be cleaned up? I guess there could be a process that runs
>> and checks to see if the original file/folder exists and if it doesn't,
>> then remove the shadow copies, but that seems bass-ackward to me... I'd
>> put my money on the shadow copies being deleted when the original file
>> is deleted.
>>
>> Lang