From: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:26:21 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: Burning papers
In-Reply-To: <199801251819.MAA17338@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <19980126001920.08937@songbird.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Sun, Jan 25, 1998 at 11:56:20AM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote:
> At 12:19 PM 1/25/98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> >Just for your information, I _WAS_ mistaken. The papers burned really
> >well. My confusion about burnability of papers arose because in the
> >past I tried to burn magazines, and not papers and letters. The whole
> >big box is gone, after two burns. Burning is unquestionably better than
> >shredding.
> 
> There are shredders, and then there are shredders.  The SOHO-sized
> shredders that just cut things into ribbons aren't very thorough
> (and it's been demonstrated that documents shredded that way can
> be reassembled by sufficiently large numbers of Iranian college students)
> but they're good prep for burning the papers.
> On the other hand, the cross-cut shredders that leave flakes no more
> than 1/8" rectangles or even smaller chad are good enough for
> classified documents.

Maybe some classified documents.  Certainly not for some others.  

-- 
Kent Crispin, PAB Chair			"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html