You have tried avoiding answering the question of where the legislation is that's for sure.
Why do you think people in IT are not interested in fulfilling their obligations?
And why are the government not advising the IT trade and software developers of their obligations?
And why are the government not advising the IT trade and software developers of their obligations?
Perhaps there is some sort of IT cabal.
If only there were some website where young software developers could check to see they are meeting legislative requirements...
Note: "As of November 2007, the United States Department of Defense considers overwriting acceptable for clearing magnetic media within the same security area/zone, but not as a sanitization method. Only degaussing or physical destruction is acceptable for the latter"
Stop reading Wikipedia, it's written by amateurs like your self.
As for the link you have posted, it clearly states that it is based upon a paper that has been published and no actual physical experiments have taken place.
So I stand by what I say, as I've seen and done this in a physical form.
Until you can say that you've done the same and it does not work then shut up.
RobertCrowther, he's the poster that just keeps giving! ..... secret agent, web designer, professional witness, secret agent, IT tech support, data recovery expert, security consultant etc etc......
Its some lovely piece of law, probably the best ever passed in laa laa land, pity its not anything that has impact on uk policy but the fact that they require 2 tinky winkys and a nu-nu to witness data destruction is an absolute genious piece of writing by the government there
Its some lovely piece of law, probably the best ever passed in laa laa land, pity its not anything that has impact on uk policy but the fact that they require 2 tinky winkys and a nu-nu to witness data destruction is an absolute genious piece of writing by the government there
Shame you can't even find whiskey in a whiskey bottle, as proved in the other thread, your IT skills are useless.
I've tried, but some people on this forum can't seem to grasp the basics of computer science.
I think the best thing to do is for all those who are in IT, please leave and those that are in computer science can stay and learn about this legislation and the use of software to securely delete data.
There are plenty of computer scientists here. Could you post the legislation your talking about? Obviously a wikipedia link is not going to suffice here.
There are plenty of computer scientists here. Could you post the legislation your talking about? Obviously a wikipedia link is not going to suffice here.
That's so laughable because there is someone who keeps posting against me who in another thread has said that they could not mend some persons computer because they were not qualified.
There are plenty of computer scientists here. Could you post the legislation your talking about? Obviously a wikipedia link is not going to suffice here.
And ironically, of course, his CS/IT distinction is precisely the wrong way around. Legislation and compliance are not CS issues, they're the sort of governance issues that CIOs concern themselves with.
Had to read some legislation this week, which reminded me of this thread. Extract:
"(9)The Secretary of State may by regulations do one or both of the following—
(a)alter the constituents of any calculation to be made under subsection (2) or (3) above (whether by adding, deleting or amending items);
(b)alter the rules governing the making of any calculation under subsection (2) or (3) above (whether by deleting or amending subsections (5) to [F11(8B)] above, or any of them, or by adding other provisions, or by a combination of those methods)."
From what I have read over the years, a fairly standard scenario of primary legislation allowing further secondary legislation.
So in terms of the subject, there could have been primary legislation that focused on terrorism or organised crime that allowed the Sec of State to introduce secondary legislation that involved the use of software to prevent terrorism or organised crime.
However, I'm pretty sure that the Gaudrian Or Independent would have highlighted the fact that civil liberties had been impinged. Alternatively, the Sun or Mail would have written "No hiding place for pedo (sic) scum"
So I conclude the former FM's claim to be bollocks.
Comments
And why are the government not advising the IT trade and software developers of their obligations?
Given you are a Web Developer doesn't that include you.
You can't learn about something that does not exist.
Think this is my weeks favourite thread
If only there were some website where young software developers could check to see they are meeting legislative requirements...
From the other thread about USB formatting and general bollox
RobertCrowther, he's the poster that just keeps giving!
Its some lovely piece of law, probably the best ever passed in laa laa land, pity its not anything that has impact on uk policy but the fact that they require 2 tinky winkys and a nu-nu to witness data destruction is an absolute genious piece of writing by the government there
Shame you can't even find whiskey in a whiskey bottle, as proved in the other thread, your IT skills are useless.
Originally Posted by robertcrowther View Post
Stop reading Wikipedia, it's written by amateurs like your self.<
Then stop posting links to Wikipedia then as you say they are written by amateurs then you must also be an amateur to post them.
There are plenty of computer scientists here. Could you post the legislation your talking about? Obviously a wikipedia link is not going to suffice here.
That's so laughable because there is someone who keeps posting against me who in another thread has said that they could not mend some persons computer because they were not qualified.
And ironically, of course, his CS/IT distinction is precisely the wrong way around. Legislation and compliance are not CS issues, they're the sort of governance issues that CIOs concern themselves with.
I'm amazed it look so long for him to be made 'inactive'. I doubt he'll learn.
Perhaps he has been "securely erased"
Post of the week!
You've Been Erased
I hope he comes back, great fun.
"(9)The Secretary of State may by regulations do one or both of the following—
(a)alter the constituents of any calculation to be made under subsection (2) or (3) above (whether by adding, deleting or amending items);
(b)alter the rules governing the making of any calculation under subsection (2) or (3) above (whether by deleting or amending subsections (5) to [F11(8B)] above, or any of them, or by adding other provisions, or by a combination of those methods)."
From what I have read over the years, a fairly standard scenario of primary legislation allowing further secondary legislation.
So in terms of the subject, there could have been primary legislation that focused on terrorism or organised crime that allowed the Sec of State to introduce secondary legislation that involved the use of software to prevent terrorism or organised crime.
However, I'm pretty sure that the Gaudrian Or Independent would have highlighted the fact that civil liberties had been impinged. Alternatively, the Sun or Mail would have written "No hiding place for pedo (sic) scum"
So I conclude the former FM's claim to be bollocks.