On 10/13/2018 10:50 PM, grarpamp wrote:
>> But write-once CDs are pretty safe, I think. No?
>
> In customary use, probably, far more than any of the formerly
> mentioned non hardware write protectable devices.
>
> To be sure you'd need to use it in a old drive that has no
> writing
>> There is never "no" disk, just a matter of which ones
>> are plugged into the box, physically, or remotely.
> using USB
... is using an attached disk, ie: a read-write [block device],
that can be trivially written to by / through the kernel driver
interfaces or in the raw. Unless it has a
On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 08:35:09PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
> On 10/13/2018 08:42 AM, Mirimir wrote:
> >> There is never "no" disk, just a matter of which ones
> >> are plugged into the box, physically, or remotely.
> >
> > OK, I should have said "unless there _is_ no disk, as there _can be_ in
On 10/13/2018 08:42 AM, Mirimir wrote:
>> There is never "no" disk, just a matter of which ones
>> are plugged into the box, physically, or remotely.
>
> OK, I should have said "unless there _is_ no disk, as there _can be_ in
> Tails". I've run Tails (and my own LiveCDs) on diskless machines.
On 10/12/2018 11:56 PM, grarpamp wrote:
This is the use case for Tails. . . . [T]here are no writes to storage,
unless users configure [otherwise] . . . .
>
>> Sure, but this isn't a _Tor_ issue. It's just about Tor browser, which
>> is just (heavily) modified Firefox. And although I'm
