east-Tec Eraser 2009

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by EASTER, Apr 17, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,634
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I been trying this eraser/privacy app exclusively for peformance sakes as i do all wipers/erasers in the belief that a cleared platter free of debris leftovers makes for a snappier response when doing everyday chores including some surfing.

    I can't remember the name of a member who mentioned a free app he uses that not only encrypts files but also deletes already deleted files, and i have it smothered someplace on one of my drives.

    But on experiementing with East-Tec i found it uses the exact type of method of using a temporary file which it deletes later after wiping a drives free space because i soon get a LOW ON DISC SPACE WARNING everytime i use it just like that free version done.

    But i have an issue with East-Tec in that it might overwrite with it's claim "No Hardware Restore" wipe but on finishing i can take an old obsolete freeware named RESTORATION and it's loaded to bear with tmp.1, tmp2.s, etc i that one can only assume East-Tec uses (like others before them) to perform it's coverup duties of already deleted data and that greatly increases the time i have to take again just to wipe those tmp files and then remove their file records to boot.

    Point is, theres got to be a better way then consuming all that extra time with EAST-TEC i would think, maybe i'm wrong, but i can use RECUVA to delete most already deleted files except those "Resident in the $MFT or "No files to delete" and then perform a RESTORATION after that and i don't get near the HUGE amount of data that EAST-TEC adds to RESTORATION'S LIST.

    Can anyone better explain exactly the reason i am running into this with EAST-TEC and should i just forget it or not. I must say however, after a EAST-TEC wipe files slack and other features like "scramble file properties", on my very first try, that particular drive seems to perform very much better, not anything to write home about, but just simply smoother and somewhat faster.

    I been after this for what seems like years now, trying to piece together the right amount of elements to give the HD a better, smoother road to travel, but here i am still contesting one method with yet others for that ultimate longer gain for performance followed by a good defrag.

    Trouble is this never ends, the moment the PC comes on, something is always being written to disk not to mention surfing or other local duties that at the end of the day begins the process all over again for a couple minute satisfaction that the drive is clean enough to tell the difference between delays and sharper responses.

    iS THERE EVER GOING TO BE AN AUTOMATED SANITIZER CREATED FOR USERS AT THE END OF THE DAY OR ARE WE FOREVER GOING TO GROW TIRED OF PICKING UP THE LEFTOVER PIECES EVERYDAY OURSELVES?

    EASTER
     
  2. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,634
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    Dunno what this will lead to but am going to examine every aspect of it after it's finished wiping and then check in RESTORATION how many tmp.'s it made then run a defrag to determine if it will gain performance or not.
     

    Attached Files:

    • R.jpg
      R.jpg
      File size:
      25.5 KB
      Views:
      389
  3. rookieman

    rookieman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Posts:
    409
    I hope you post the results of this:thumb:
     
  4. EASTER

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,634
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    I will.

    I'm still evaluating it. I guess it's really not so bad that it adds tons in the thousands of additional entries to RESTORATION that i always use to finish up a routine sessions wipe because i close down explorer while it runs and then it doesn't take that long to complete.

    So far it's impressive and best of all doesn't appear to pressure the hard drive like some i've tried before.

    EASTER
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.