From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 6126 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2023 21:43:42 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 27 Jan 2023 21:43:42 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7066642578; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 07:43:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-oa1-f47.google.com (mail-oa1-f47.google.com [209.85.160.47]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E68B042565 for ; Sat, 28 Jan 2023 07:43:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-oa1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-15085b8a2f7so8268054fac.2 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 13:43:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DUi1IlVMg+XRgShFtaE7SuFaqEJrTS82AZl1Hc5xuMg=; b=YXZNxzeO+mhp+F0lStm13f98C2LqqosPPxXIqmpSyJCmXsjwSSYCBMxVJb6gHL2xSz 8yC1RP97Q+EVQnFELX1+kBxpyqKAp1CatPm2gUQ+w5foJCnLSnqaFT4jNttoEjzAsMsL V+YIACztfFqc9IlBzpxLzILHbOKhyqFS+959arSe9Ebw/5oBq33xjhwhp7Lqw8ImbXxO eoTFPONjH4ekClDffyRnoXIFRblJ5ExPmu/zEqwtqBAySEx81uQswWBeZ/HZ8ZGjSvgn i7uiUjzpHaVK+V8P2U4XP7s3b2gtbePgTn6xT8oc5U7qKOeox0oivLx1Udbu0G/oLJwH Bglw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=DUi1IlVMg+XRgShFtaE7SuFaqEJrTS82AZl1Hc5xuMg=; b=cJ4o5YS3/VzdslEQVLbvM/6Jpk86tW5RjTA67AI2jIEIhxhDaeyUs+lldkPt87Mzeq /mMZRHQlqDwEmaA9yUBBgF33hqiS0Qll2oJiW1PfAXcCoB/vddIxzZLovXOG87UyHFk9 QUwObR0jdKNrU57NOMbYuyTINksItpZNESEHuhhZdNdV3a9PJi7IGpqSzdb4og0Ft0S3 WADwnsTPBBLNtSAihgUil73gugkqtVdxGbPSdllcvfzKbyJKvrj8Rys3GYyAKjSUpBqw 9suUOxHTyremHhtnP+1INGkt0SbZwoOqcPcDtZfuMMrVY7kF+YonrFEmRMSm5UFhHxF8 wVZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpeOCqNo6Y6UVPPrO4CjTZfw+kMZ1yII+/f4ZIZg7AVzyJ67kuF RQLUR9Ca5CMe5aoFzRPKwPIJcSDoP8ER9/qGquo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXspd95VMVzCvwvdvaxEh1V8bxeYbyWj6nqswBewAbtoaIYLJdaJjGQTdRiKQc/KVi34+A//m+fWuX4XIRL47t8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:b1a4:b0:15f:26da:1bc6 with SMTP id an36-20020a056871b1a400b0015f26da1bc6mr2287108oac.191.1674855748826; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 13:42:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230125203805.4762218C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <7w8rhpdczd.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> <20230126105626.72CD922168@orac.inputplus.co.uk> <20230127135651.A70482135B@orac.inputplus.co.uk> In-Reply-To: From: Tom Perrine Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 13:42:17 -0800 Message-ID: To: Ron Natalie Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f57ae305f345bdda" Message-ID-Hash: 7LICTHQIYX5GKF2BA5NPYUSVOINYVG4S X-Message-ID-Hash: 7LICTHQIYX5GKF2BA5NPYUSVOINYVG4S X-MailFrom: tom.perrine@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tuhs.tuhs.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: tuhs@tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Setting up an X Development Environment for Mac OS List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --000000000000f57ae305f345bdda Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A tiny bit of a fork, but... When I was at SDSC.EDU we did a project for the National Archives. Gotta love an agency that's mission is "data for the lifetime of the Republic"... They wanted to be sure that they could still access data at least 100 years later, even assuming that no one had accessed it in that 100 year period. Anyway, we looked at all the options at the time (very early 2000s). While media lifetime was indeed understood to be critical, we specifically called out needing to retain the software and the encryption keys. AND the encryption algorithms! At that time, media encryption was still quite new, and they hadn't considered that issue. At all. Overall, the best, most practical approach (at that time) was to periodically copy the data forward, into new media, into new storage software, and decrypting with the old keys and algos, and re-encrypting with new. Only by doing this periodically, we argued, could they really be sure of being able to recover data 100+ years from now. Don't get me started on the degradation of early generation optical media that was guaranteed for 50 years, but rusted internally within 2 years. And of course now there are companies that specialize in providing mothballed obsolete tape and other readers. --tep On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 6:55 AM Ron Natalie wrote: > When I worked in the intelligience industry, the government spent a lot > of money tasking someone (I think it was Kodak) to determine the best > media for archival storage. It included traditional 6250 9 track > tapes and the then-popular exabyte 8mm (which was atrociously short > lived). I pointed out that magnetic storage was probably always going > to be problematic and things needed =E2=80=9Cdigital refresh=E2=80=9D if = you really > wanted to keep them. > > > If you know the tape may be problematic when played back, there are > things you can do. I was gifted the master tapes of one of the radio > shows originated at WJHU in the 70=E2=80=99s. I had them sent out to a = company > who =E2=80=9Cbaked=E2=80=9D them, but then they also had to redo all the = splices on them > when they were played back. > --000000000000f57ae305f345bdda Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A tiny bit of a fork, but...

When I was= at SDSC.EDU we did a project for the Natio= nal Archives. Gotta love an agency that's mission is "data for the= lifetime of the Republic"...

They wanted to = be sure that they could still access data at least 100 years later, even as= suming that no one had accessed it in that 100 year period.

<= /div>
Anyway, we looked at all the options at the time=C2=A0(very early= 2000s).

While media lifetime was indeed understoo= d to be critical, we specifically called out needing to retain the software= and the encryption keys. AND the encryption algorithms!
At that = time, media encryption was still quite new, and they hadn't considered = that issue. At all.

Overall, the best, most practi= cal approach (at that time) was to periodically copy the data forward, into= new media, into new storage=C2=A0software, and decrypting with the old key= s and algos, and re-encrypting with=C2=A0new.

Only= by doing this periodically, we argued, could they really be sure of being = able to recover data 100+ years from now.

Don'= t get me started on the degradation of early generation optical media that = was guaranteed for 50 years, but rusted internally within 2 years.

And of course now there are companies that specialize in p= roviding mothballed obsolete tape and other readers.

--tep



On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 6:55 AM= Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote:
Wh= en I worked in the intelligience industry, the government spent a lot
of money tasking someone (I think it was Kodak) to determine the best
media for archival storage.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 It included traditional 6250 9 tra= ck
tapes and the then-popular exabyte 8mm (which was atrociously short
lived).=C2=A0 =C2=A0I pointed out that magnetic storage was probably always= going
to be problematic and things needed =E2=80=9Cdigital refresh=E2=80=9D if yo= u really
wanted to keep them.


If you know the tape may be problematic when played back, there are
things you can do.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I was gifted the master tapes of one of the= radio
shows originated at WJHU in the 70=E2=80=99s.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I had them sent o= ut to a company
who =E2=80=9Cbaked=E2=80=9D them, but then they also had to redo all the sp= lices on them
when they were played back.
--000000000000f57ae305f345bdda--