Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RFE: Add SAS/SATA/NVMe "SANITIZE" command option for secure erasure #1235

Open
MrPippin66 opened this issue Dec 31, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@MrPippin66
Copy link

MrPippin66 commented Dec 31, 2023

I see no option in the current code for anything beyond the "SECURE ERASE" command invocation.

Per the NIST standard (NIST Special Publication 800-88, Revision 1, Guidelines for Media Sanitization), it's preferred to use the 'SANITIZE" command over "SECURE ERASE" where available.

I would request this option be supported in a future release.

It would also be advisable to allow Cryptographic Erase, where SED has been used.

Enhanced Erase mode. The ATA Sanitize Device feature set commands are preferred
over the over the ATA Security feature set SECURITY ERASE UNIT command when
supported by the ATA device.
@tbzatek tbzatek changed the title Feature Request: Add SAS/SATA/NVMe "SANITIZE" command option for secure erasure RFE: Add SAS/SATA/NVMe "SANITIZE" command option for secure erasure Jan 1, 2024
@tbzatek
Copy link
Member

tbzatek commented Jan 1, 2024

Agree, this would be useful. No promises when this actually happens, patches welcome.

The NVMe Sanitize command is available since the last release. Let us know if it fits your needs. Support for additional TPs like TP4152 may be added in the future.

There's currently no specific support for SAS drives (like the org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Drive.Ata interface). #1007 will be needed first.

Also, there's been a similar secure erase request, although that's about overwrite methods: #971

@MrPippin66
Copy link
Author

Thanks!

Overall is supporting the same "sanitize" command function on the major protocols (SAS/SATA/NVMe).

The chain dependency is understandable.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants