The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Comments on: Computer saves shredded Stasi files

Data Protection 

Posted Thursday 10th May 2007 14:06 GMT

So the Stasi kept files that we today would consider a breach of privacy.

OK.

So the Stasi destroyed the files.

Fine.

And now we're reconstructing documents that detail the minutiae of the private lives (including sexual proclivities) of countless citizens, many of whom are doubtless still alive?!?!?

So next time the government or any public agency deletes my records (as if they ever do), I get my secrets back -- for however long it takes for some future historian to decide to reconstruct the government files of the Third Way Reich in order to better document their crimes.

Ah, God bless privacy.

Crime and secrecy 

Posted Thursday 10th May 2007 14:39 GMT

But not just anyone can read the files, so they're not made completely public. Even when a citizen gets to read their own file, parts of it are anonymised so that secrets not relevant to their own case aren't revealed.

The main reason is that there are many unsolved crimes that the Stasi committed, including murder.

If someone close to me had disappeared in the GDR, I'd be waiting for the results with baited breath!

Shredding documents 

Posted Thursday 10th May 2007 15:24 GMT

are these the same people that encourage us to shred all personal documents, so that they may not be used for identity fraud, yet here we have a set of people who are deliberately trying to reverse this?

Where were they for Enron and Anderson

First shred, then burn, then leave your, erm, 'calling card' in the bin 

Posted Thursday 10th May 2007 15:39 GMT

I don't know whose bright idea it was that thought that just shredding sensitive docs made them safe. Burning has to happen, or you have to make the shredded documents a less attractive source of private information. It's like running away from a bear -- you don't have to be faster than the bear -- just faster than your red-shirted friend.

Shredding or torn? 

Posted Friday 11th May 2007 13:47 GMT

"600 million shreds from 45 million documents"

That's thirteen shreds for each document. That's not shredding, that's simply tearing it up.

To be effective you need a cross-cut shredder. A shredder that produces pieces of paper the size of a Didcot {cf. The Meaning of Liff].

Don’t Miss

Dollar101 uses for a former merchant banker

Comment Innovators who work out the best one will make a killing

The Year in Operating Systems: No battle of big ideas

Small change for 2009

Photography: Yes, you have rights

Comment Unless the police say you haven't

Enormous HP box spotted from space

Exclusive pics of Peterborough packaging pandemonium