My personal opinion about Eraser 6 - Pros and Cons

[Joel]

I'm allowing free speech here, but give constructive criticism here instead of just ranting.

 

[NickJG]

Using Windows Vista: Eraser 6 is generally a really good too and it's free so I appreciate that. But things like the following are very annoying:
1) Finding that deleting unused disk space won't work unless you right-click and run as administrator.
2) Finding that after attempting to delete unused disk space this had not happened as all disk space had been used up.
3) Having deleted all the files created by eraser that were taking up the disk space, the same thing happens each time I run eraser so it never completes, even though I have plenty of free disk space.
4) Having to search the forums each time to find a solution to each problem such as 1) and 2). Then I read this is a common problem dealt with in FAQs. If so it should be prominent in the documentation. Nowhere in the documentation is there a simple step by step guide to erasing unused disk space that can be followed and actually works. I am still stuck with problem 3) so I can't delete unused disk space and have eraser successfully complete the task. Why isn't all the unnecessary data deleted as eraser runs, rather than stored until the program has (or hasn't) completed? I am far from being an IT expert but these kind of issues baffle me.
In conclusion I do appreciate this software being made available free, but it seems strange to me that eraser uses such highly advanced and skillfully written code but that such basic issues that would make the software user-friendly have been overlooked.

 

[Joel]

Using Windows Vista: Eraser 6 is generally a really good too and it's free so I appreciate that. But things like the following are very annoying:
1) Finding that deleting unused disk space won't work unless you right-click and run as administrator.

That's a Vista UAC issue, not something we can work around at the moment, but will be fixed in a long run. The error message returned should be clear enough to not require a user to come to the forum to check it up.

2) Finding that after attempting to delete unused disk space this had not happened as all disk space had been used up.
3) Having deleted all the files created by eraser that were taking up the disk space, the same thing happens each time I run eraser so it never completes, even though I have plenty of free disk space.

This is really only one problem and it is being researched on. There is an experimental fix already made, but test results are still inconclusive.

4) Having to search the forums each time to find a solution to each problem such as 1) and 2). Then I read this is a common problem dealt with in FAQs. If so it should be prominent in the documentation. Nowhere in the documentation is there a simple step by step guide to erasing unused disk space that can be followed and actually works. I am still stuck with problem 3) so I can't delete unused disk space and have eraser successfully complete the task. Why isn't all the unnecessary data deleted as eraser runs, rather than stored until the program has (or hasn't) completed? I am far from being an IT expert but these kind of issues baffle me.

Until recently, it's baffled me too. I guess the point I'm making is that Eraser starts off implementing features theoretically to achieve a given goal. When real-world conditions are no longer clean-room conditions, we fix them. Eraser 6 hasn't been around long enough for all the real-world conditions to be pre-empted. Each maintenance release fixes some, in the hopes that Eraser becomes a lot more stable.

 

[snowdrift]

I have thought a few times over the past year, what a coup it would be for law enforcement (on whatever local, national, or global level) to infiltrate Eraser and destroy it. My thought is probably crazy, but trashing a free program that was best in breed would certainly be an effort of mine if I were in Interpol, for example.

 

[DavidHB]

I have thought a few times over the past year, what a coup it would be for law enforcement (on whatever local, national, or global level) to infiltrate Eraser and destroy it. My thought is probably crazy, but trashing a free program that was best in breed would certainly be an effort of mine if I were in Interpol, for example.

Unfortunately for the law enforcement agencies (or, more usually, for anyone who wants to invade our privacy), Eraser is not that broken. 6.0.7. fixed the problems that stopped it working on Windows 7 x64, for example. At Joel's most recent posts accept, some things are not working as they should, and some Eraser 5 features (or equivalent) have yet to be implemented, but the program is now usable.

As one who has used Eraser in its various versions for some time, I know that Eraser 5 was not without its problems, and it only became as stable as it did over years of development. But the trouble with any piece of software is that, however carefully you work, the code eventually becomes too messy to maintain properly, and each patch only adds to the messiness, particularly when the more recent changes to the Windows security model are taken into account. I can't second-guess the decision of the Eraser Team that the time had come for a complete re-write, but I do know that that is the kind of decision every program team has to take at some point.

Of course, once you are dealing with a wholly new program, as Joel points out, all users of the early versions become, in effect, beta testers (sometimes, it's felt like being an alpha tester!); the resources available to the team do not allow for anything else. Given that Eraser (even in its current form) is the best available freeware program of its kind that I know, it makes sense for me and other people who, in their own interest, want Eraser to succeed to be as constructive as we can while the teamworks its way through the residual issues, which are, in my experience, being addressed progressively in the development builds.

David

 

[jimiguitarman5]

I switched back to version 5.8.8, because version 6 is a nightmare. My biggest issues:

- A huge process of about 40MB has to run in the background all the time
- It's not possible to choose the erase method on-the-fly. In version 5, after choosing 'Erase' from the context menu, it was possible to choose the erase method and make adjustments such as 'Cluster Tip Area' etc. or if I want to see a report at the end or not.
- The submenu on the recycle bin is basically useless. First I thought 'Oh, nice - this is now in a submenu', because I expected that there I can find the various erase methods. But no, it's just one unnecessary step to get to 'erase'.
- Several options that have been there in version 5 preferences are gone.
- The main window is clumsy and sluggish. Version 5 was neat and fast.

Suggestions for improvement:

1. Offer two entries in the context menu integration:
- 'Erase' (erase the file with the settings that have been set in the main preferences)
- 'Erase...' offer the option to change the erase settings just for this time

2. Similarly offer two entries for the recycle bin. Additionally, erase methods could be put in a submenu for direct access. Which erase methods are displayed in that submenu, should be adjustable in the preferences.

3. Discard .NET framework basis. It's a CPU and RAM hog.

4. Bring back the preference settings of version 5 (cluster tips, etc.).

5. Discard the necessity to have a process running in the background even though Eraser is not in usage at the moment.

6. Bring back erase method 'only first and last 2kbyte'. It's very handy for fast erase of less important files.

7. Discard all erase methods higher than 3-pass (anything higher than 1-pass doesn't make sense; but let's keep 3-pass for the paranoid people). Read this: http://www.anti-forensics.com/disk-wiping-one-pass-is-enough
As for me, I think 1-pass and 'only first and last 2kByte' are enough.

Basically, it would have been a much better idea to keep Eraser as it was in version 5 and from there make improvments. Version 6 is such a big mess. I can't believe it has been ruined so disgracefully. Have been using it for years and then suddenly it switched from being neat and handy to being messy and clumsy. And the worst idea was the switch to .NET. This should be cancelled immediately.

 

[Joel]

OK, let's deal with every point one at a time.

- A huge process of about 40MB has to run in the background all the time

It's running with <16MB on my computer now. Which indicator are you using to judge memory? In any case, the 40MB of RAM used will be trimmed when demand requires it by the OS.

- It's not possible to choose the erase method on-the-fly. In version 5, after choosing 'Erase' from the context menu, it was possible to choose the erase method and make adjustments such as 'Cluster Tip Area' etc. or if I want to see a report at the end or not.

This is dealt with in 6.2. However, if you consider what you've wrote later in your post, that 3 passes are for the paranoid, you could set the default erasure method to be 3 passes and use that all the time and never deal with the erasure method ever. It's a "default" for a reason. If you so deal with Top Secret information and you feel 35 passes are the minimum, you can also set that as a default. Defaults should be chosen by the user and adhered to for the majority of use cases (hence "Defaults")

- The submenu on the recycle bin is basically useless. First I thought 'Oh, nice - this is now in a submenu', because I expected that there I can find the various erase methods. But no, it's just one unnecessary step to get to 'erase'.

So what are you saying, if you consider the previous point and the one you have made later in the post about 3 passes being for the paranoid?

- Several options that have been there in version 5 preferences are gone.

Which ones, may I ask?

- The main window is clumsy and sluggish. Version 5 was neat and fast.

Unless you're running Eraser in a Virtual Machine with emulated hardware, and I've seen those before, even really old or lousy integrated graphics processors deal with the screen without issue. Maybe the About dialog is a little extravagant (give the designer some leeway there), but the rest of the application shouldn't be an issue.

1. Offer two entries in the context menu integration:
- 'Erase' (erase the file with the settings that have been set in the main preferences)
- 'Erase...' offer the option to change the erase settings just for this time

In 6.2 I've decided to do what Explorer does. Ask the user for a confirmation, and also allow the user to change the erasure options, like in v5.

2. Similarly offer two entries for the recycle bin. Additionally, erase methods could be put in a submenu for direct access. Which erase methods are displayed in that submenu, should be adjustable in the preferences.

Please see my point on defaults.

3. Discard .NET framework basis. It's a CPU and RAM hog.

If you said this 5 years ago, I would agree; I was one such critic myself. Since then the .NET framework has improved by leaps and bounds. RAM requirements for pure .NET apps are low, if not lower than, native applications (the native application would require at least the C and C++ runtime to be loaded, which is analogous to the .NET framework libraries in size and complexity)

4. Bring back the preference settings of version 5 (cluster tips, etc.).

They are there. Just not where you are used to looking. It is in the Select Data to Erase dialog.

5. Discard the necessity to have a process running in the background even though Eraser is not in usage at the moment.

There should be a topic on the design and architecture decisions somewhere in the forum, otherwise I would be writing on it soon. In summary, this was done because the disk subsystem was always seen as the bottleneck in any erase and the process allowed scheduling of the tasks so they do not stress the disks. In addition, it also allowed a very powerful scheduling system. Above that, it also allows us to deal with UAC problems better. Lastly, it was done so because most erasure tasks should be done in the background. The user would press delete and let Explorer delete files and proceed with his other work. Why should Eraser be different? Hence, the standalone process approach was picked.

6. Bring back erase method 'only first and last 2kbyte'. It's very handy for fast erase of less important files.

It is still there, as the FL16KB method.

7. Discard all erase methods higher than 3-pass (anything higher than 1-pass doesn't make sense; but let's keep 3-pass for the paranoid people). Read this: http://www.anti-forensics.com/disk-wiping-one-pass-is-enough
As for me, I think 1-pass and 'only first and last 2kByte' are enough.

You can always set it as the default erasure method. In addition, v6's FL16KB allows you to pick which erasure method to use for the 16-32KBs being erased.

Basically, it would have been a much better idea to keep Eraser as it was in version 5 and from there make improvments. Version 6 is such a big mess

Perhaps to you from the viewpoint of a user. To me as a developer of Eraser, v5 is a worse mess than you're describing v6 to be.

I can't believe it has been ruined so disgracefully. Have been using it for years and then suddenly it switched from being neat and handy to being messy and clumsy. And the worst idea was the switch to .NET.

Allow me to disagree.

This should be cancelled immediately.

Maybe a better choice would be that circumstances allowing, you join the development team and maintain the v5 branch. That would benefit the people who think like you do.

 

[imnotrich]

I'm a long time Eraser user, and a bit perplexed by some of the new version 6 changes, specifically:

1. Why is Eraser always running but does not appear in the services.msc list? I'd like the option to set Eraser to "manual." I am running Vista with 2gb of RAM and another 2gb of ready boost, still...this laptop does not have the horsepower/resources to run programs that I am not using. Need the option to either turn Eraser off or at least set it to manual.

2. Plugins, why? Eraser is not a browser. Why does it need plugins? It should be sufficient to include a handful of different algorithms on initial download. If technology changes in the meantime and some new data destruction algorithm is devised simply update the software!
I read in the forums people concerned about Eraser contacting the internet behind the scenes. Although it may be completely benign this is consistent with spyware behavior. Turn it off. Like I said, even if benign - it's something that can be exploited later on.

3. Problems with the erase unused space - I haven't seen this personally, but I note in the forums concerns about erasing unused space not working correctly. This would seem to be a major flaw, for if you're not erasing unused space...what space are you erasing? Used space? I'm anal about back ups but if there was ever a problem, I'm not keen on spending hundreds of hours reinstalling windows and restoring stuff. Not my idea of fun on a sunny day.

4. Context menu integration - Reduced functionality does not a happy user make. I understand the Microsoft model and KISS (keep it simply stupid) but suddenly there are fewer options in the context menu. I'd like to suggest for future improvement that the Eraser install forks (basic or advanced users) to allow the user more control over things like context menu, services, and so on.

5. Eraser written with... .net? What does this do to linux compatibility? Previous versions of Eraser ran happily on Linux within a WINE environment and in fact was my data destruction first choice even on my Linux machines. I haven't taken the time to experiment with version 6 in Linux but just off the top of my head I'd say .net was a poor choice. Will there even be a MAC version?

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate all the work the developers put into this project. I just wish they had re-named it. Eraser 5's were working fine for me, when I blindly downloaded the "update." I should have done some research first, I know. That said, the developers should have worked with the Eraser community to find out what features/functionality were important and which not so much, rather than making those decisions in a vacuum.

 

[DavidHB]

Most of your points have already been answered on a number of occasions and Joel has just published a useful compendium of such answers in the FAQ forum. So please forgive fairly terse responses.

1. Why is Eraser always running but does not appear in the services.msc list? I'd like the option to set Eraser to "manual." I am running Vista with 2gb of RAM and another 2gb of ready boost, still...this laptop does not have the horsepower/resources to run programs that I am not using. Need the option to either turn Eraser off or at least set it to manual.

The Eraser running process is not a resource hog when it is idle, so it's not the worst offender of its kind by any means. User feedback has been taken note of and there is an accepted ticket in Trac to have Eraser do, in effect, what you want. Part of the context that Eraser 6 is a quite rapidly evolving application.

Incidentally, the Eraser core currently runs in the background as a process. The firm plan for the future (hope fully version 6.2) is that what currently runs as a process will run as a service, and as such co-exist better with Windows security.

I read in the forums people concerned about Eraser contacting the internet behind the scenes. Although it may be completely benign this is consistent with spyware behavior. Turn it off. Like I said, even if benign - it's something that can be exploited later on.

It's not Eraser that is doing this, but Windows. And things are by no means as clear-cut as you seem to suggest. The boundary between a helpful application and malware can be nothing more than a fuzzy matter of opinion. I have lost count of the number of times applications I value have been wrongly identified by a security program as malware.

3. Problems with the erase unused space - I haven't seen this personally, but I note in the forums concerns about erasing unused space not working correctly. This would seem to be a major flaw, for if you're not erasing unused space...what space are you erasing? Used space? I'm anal about back ups but if there was ever a problem, I'm not keen on spending hundreds of hours reinstalling windows and restoring stuff. Not my idea of fun on a sunny day.

This is actually quite a complex issue, because Eraser has to work within the rather tight limits of what the OS allows. The resources available to the Eraser Team are very limited and we should perhaps not be surprised that the initial release of the program threw up bugs that the developers had not identified. Most of these are now fixed. For the program to work more comfortably with the Windows security model, the planned further development of the architecture needs to take place. Eraser 5 has the same problems, but no development route out of them.

None of the problems I have identified have caused significant damage to a Windows installation. Considering what it does, Eraser 6's footprint within Windows is relatively modest. Of course, an already damaged Windows installation can stop Eraser working, but that is true of almost any program.

4. Context menu integration - Reduced functionality does not a happy user make. I understand the Microsoft model and KISS (keep it simply stupid) but suddenly there are fewer options in the context menu. I'd like to suggest for future improvement that the Eraser install forks (basic or advanced users) to allow the user more control over things like context menu, services, and so on.

In the current development builds, options have been added to context menu erasing, mainly in the (very necessary) confirmation dialog. Creating user-configurable options requires development time the team does not have; the top priorities are to make the architectural changes currently planned, to add requested features to the UI, and to fix the (relatively few) remaining bugs.

5. Eraser written with... .net? What does this do to linux compatibility? Previous versions of Eraser ran happily on Linux within a WINE environment and in fact was my data destruction first choice even on my Linux machines. I haven't taken the time to experiment with version 6 in Linux but just off the top of my head I'd say .net was a poor choice. Will there even be a MAC version?

Eraser has always been a Windows-only program. The reasons for choosing .NET are explained in Joel's post, referred to above. Good decision or bad, it cannot now be undone. In any case, it's not a decision I'd want to second-guess; in my experience, prejudices for or against a particular piece of technology are far more enduring than the circumstances in which those prejudices originate.

The developers should have worked with the Eraser community to find out what features/functionality were important and which not so much, rather than making those decisions in a vacuum.

They did. That is what Trac was and is about. The trouble is, as Joel, will confirm, it is almost impossible to get people to respond to ideas. They want to respond to actual software. Which means that you have to write and distribute the software in order to get the response.

A final point of my own. Most of what I would call the ideological criticisms of Eraser 6 come from former users of Eraser 5. It is almost as if, at some level, people cannot forgive Eraser 6 for not being Eraser 5. But, in my book, Eraser 5 was useful but quite deeply flawed application; I have lost track of the number of times its messy UI tricked me into doing something stupid. To me as to others, Eraser 6 came as something of a culture shock, but I soon realised that the UI was a great deal simpler, more logical and idiot- (i.e. me-) proof than its predecessor. I decided that, if I needed Eraser (and I did), the best thing I could do was to help the team (in my case, through beta- (and sometimes alpha-) testing, and responding to user queries on the forum), rather than just moan about the problems. The commitment of the team is such that it deserves our support, and with that support Eraser 6 can become a far better application than Eraser 5 ever was.

David

 

[Joel]

2. Plugins, why? Eraser is not a browser. Why does it need plugins? It should be sufficient to include a handful of different algorithms on initial download. If technology changes in the meantime and some new data destruction algorithm is devised simply update the software!

It's also part of the drive towards distributing development. Eraser is short on manpower. If features can be developed by people outside the core development team and maintained by them, all the better as we can concentrate on the core features. Remember that at a point in time Eraser was targeted to have the ability to clean histories, MRU lists etc (that feature is still targeted) and those will require updates from outside the core program.

The developers should have worked with the Eraser community to find out what features/functionality were important and which not so much, rather than making those decisions in a vacuum.

They did. That is what Trac was and is about. The trouble is, as Joel, will confirm, it is almost impossible to get people to respond to ideas. They want to respond to actual software. Which means that you have to write and distribute the software in order to get the response.

Eraser 6 was in development for two years. For those two years community support was, to say the least, lacking. Few people came forward to proactively test and feedback on the program during development. Eraser is open-source -- but it's only worthwhile being so if community feedback came along consistently and constructively. It's not too late to provide your constructive viewpoints -- rants and attacks do not help -- please do come forward with useful ideas and we would try to accommodate them, unless it runs against our design philosophies (mostly already outlined in the FAQ thread)

 

[imnotrich]

Sorry guys, the title of this thread was "my personal opinion about Eraser 6 - pros and cons. If you interpreted my opinions and suggestions for improvement as a rant, that was not my intent and I apologize. I was expressing sadness at what seems to be a huge step backwards from version 5 to 6 and I don't find anything in the FAQ's to change my opinion.

Any running process that is not currently needed is, in my opinion, a resource hog.

And I'm not sure why pointing fingers at Windows for a problem Eraser is having makes sense, especially if - as you point out - Eraser has always been a Windows program. It's supposed to work WITH windows, not conflict with windows.

Not sure what outreach was done to the community seeking their input while version 6 was in development, I surely wasn't aware of it and from the tone of other posts it would seem a lot of people were caught flatfooted by the changes. I will give version 6 a fair test drive but I could very well end up returning to the previous, stable and more useful 5 series.

Finally, I do hope you spend more time on user input. When you say "please do come forward with useful ideas and we would try to accommodate them, unless it runs against our design philosophies" you might just as well have said "we know what is best for our users, so we alone will make the decisions."

 

[DavidHB]

Please be assured that I did not think that your post was a rant, and its tone was entirely in keeping with both the forum in general and this thread in particular. My reply was intended as a courtesy as well as an expression of my own views. I read Joel's response in the same way.

We'll have to agree to disagree about the running process. As a fix is in the pipeline, it's probably not worth a lengthy discussion in any case.

The problem with Windows is that it changed, and changed in ways that were not helpful. For example, UAC is in my view a disaster (and despite widespread comment to the contrary, has not really improved in Windows 7), because it limits user choice without, as we have discovered, materially improving user security. In certain respects, therefore, Windows has made it significantly harder for applications such as Eraser to co-exist with its security model. This manifests itself in a number of ways, so the solution to the problem is necessarily complex, and, with the resources available to the Eraser Team, both requires the progressive approach they have adopted and involves trial and error.

As regards the issue of user input, I too am on the user side of the fence. Joel seems to me to be making a fair point, which is that, with an open source application, users need to become participants if they want to influence the development. Trac has been available for user input from Day 1. If I didn't take the trouble to find out what was there while development was in train, and so was surprised when I downloaded and installed Eraser 6 (and that is pretty much what happened in my case), does that give me a legitimate beef against the Eraser Team? My own view, having thought about it, is that it doesn't. You are free to think differently, and that is a good thing.

David

 

[Joel]

Eraser is open-source -- but it's only worthwhile being so if community feedback came along consistently and constructively. It's not too late to provide your constructive viewpoints -- rants and attacks do not help -- please do come forward with useful ideas and we would try to accommodate them, unless it runs against our design philosophies (mostly already outlined in the FAQ thread)

Hello imnotrich, I guess I should clarify my post.

When I was talking about rants and attacks, I wasn't specifically referring to you, but as a general reminder. My apologies if it seemed as though it was directed towards you; I don't think your initial post nor your second post were rants.

And I'm not sure why pointing fingers at Windows for a problem Eraser is having makes sense, especially if - as you point out - Eraser has always been a Windows program. It's supposed to work WITH windows, not conflict with windows.

Well, we aren't exactly pointing fingers; we're just explaining what's going on. Eraser 5 didn't depend on the PKI infrastructure of Windows, Eraser 6 does for the safety of our users. Technically, the internet connection is to verify that certificates used to sign the program have not been revoked by the certification authority, as is possible when a developer who went through proper channels for identity verification etc turns out to be a malware author. It's a safety mechanism to ensure that code that runs is always trusted. Perhaps it may be bothering you, but in my opinion it's a rather important feature to have. In the event that the internet connection isn't available, the check is just skipped.

Finally, I do hope you spend more time on user input. When you say "please do come forward with useful ideas and we would try to accommodate them, unless it runs against our design philosophies" you might just as well have said "we know what is best for our users, so we alone will make the decisions."

I was trying to qualify my statement, lest it be used as a blanket statement against us in future. Our design philosophies are relatively general and quite flexible. The intent of the qualification was to ensure that outrageous requests (such as those meant for one person alone, with little benefit to the rest) do not get implemented as a high priority task and the person suggesting holding us at ransom. My apologies once again for the misunderstanding.

 

[Visitor]

From the FAQ

The confirmation box with user-selectable overwrite passes which may differ from case-to-case has been done away with. At least allow an option for those users who prefer to have it. This also served as a warning in case a user made a mistake when clicking on Eraser right-click option; currently there is none!
This will be dealt with in 6.2. However, the design of 6.0 is still sound as "defaults" are there for a reason. If the information that one deals with warrants 35-pass erasures all the time, you should be setting that as a default. If you think that you just want to get rid of file headers, use the First/Last 16KB erasure method. The idea is pick one default that works for all the files you deal with. Defaults should be chosen by the you (you have the ability to!) and adhered to for the majority of use cases (hence "Defaults")

Also this concern is raised in this forum topic several times and the answer always seems to be you "should" do it the way I (the author) thinks is the right way to do it. And a bit of lecturing going on about why defaults exist and so on. Is it accurate this long after the FAQ said "this will be dealt with in 6.2" or that in fact the decision is that the ability to select erasure type on the fly will never be returned?

The ability to select different methods was there for a reason. There are many user situations / security strategies that do not neatly fit into a fixed default setting, hence the ability to "select" erasure method.

Obviously it is perfectly legitimate for an author, particular one who is providing code freely, to impose his own doctrinal view about what people "should" do. But it would also be nice to know if this is a permanent philosophical decision or one that will be adjusted as indicated in the FAQ.

Most Important Question: are there any known issues with version 5.8 that strongly indicate it is no longer safe to use?

 

[Joel]

6.2 has the feature implemented. It will not be backported to 6.0 because the minor versions are supposed to be compatible with each other. There are no weaknesses identified in 5.8, Eraser 6 and 5.8 use the same approach to erasure (in terms of broad strokes), only the exact implementation differs.

I think my original point still stands, though. There'll never be a situation where very user's wishes are taken into consideration, it would be natural for developers (open source or otherwise) to develop code as they wish. Just that in the case of proprietary code if their licensing model is that involving monetary gain, they have market forces to contend with. Generally, a balance must be met between configurability and ease of use. Eraser's now a lot more accessible than before (visibly seen by the number of questions and the type of questions raised in the forum), what may be useful to one may be confusing to others.

 

[Davidb86]

Running windows 8 64 Bit
Good work Joel I'll always support eraser in some fashion or another BUT
I went back to 5.8.8.
While I'm thinking about it,, Is the psuedorandom date erase method different from 6 and 5?
Issues with 6.
Horrible popups that I can't seem to turn off anywhere
Always in the task bar hogging my memory.
No Erase Secure move
5 is lighter on memory, easier to use, no popups, doesn't hang in the taskbar, unless you want a erase report stays pretty silent..On the right click recycle bin it's easy to modify reg settings so some or all the erasing options are turned off.
Unless the actual erasing methods have changed, making 6 better at erasing then I'm sticking with 5..
BTW Using active file recovery and a USB filled with flv and mp4's I erased files with psuedorandom date then free space and was unable to recover. All I saw was a bunch of random generated letters and numbers..

 

[rarebear]

Eraser 6 is a complete mess. I've used it on numerous computers, numerous different versions of windows, every version of 6xx has proven to be nothing but unreliable and just plain bad. I just shake my head at how they let something that used to be so good go to such a waste. In before Joel says it works fine on his machine. I've seen nothing but complaints about version 6 about how unstable it is since it came out, I've never once seen anything positive said about version 6. It is really time for somebody else to take over this project. I hope Joel realizes this and finds somebody to take over who knows what they are doing.

 

[garrett01]

We moved to Eraser 6 and .Net because volunteers could not be found for the C++ version. Currently Joel is busy in university and I'm limited in the amount of time I can spend on the project.
I do agree the .NET version is a lot less compact but that is the cost of progress.

>>every version of 6xx has proven to be nothing but unreliable and just plain bad.
Can you expand on this a little. V6 was written from scratch with features retrofitted with each new release.

 

[Just a Guy]

Re: Version 6 a downgrade rather than upgrade

I also have to agree. I foolishly installed Eraser Version 6. My biggest problem with version 6 is that as far as I can tell, it REQUIRES an internet connection to start erasing files. When I set my firewall to block all internet traffic, eraser won't even load unless I allow internet traffic. Here is a link to the specific question being asked of "How can I use eraser without an internet connection?" (asked by William070707) The response from the developer did not even answer the question that was asked.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8648

If I turn my firewall on to allow all internet traffic, and then unplug my ethernet cable, eraser version 6 will not load, if I load it before I stop internet traffic and then unplug the ethernet cable, eraser will not erase anything, it just hangs there.

I re-installed version 5, and then used the Gutmann method to clean my machine of version 6. Good riddance!

So now I am asking again, Why does eraser version 6 REQUIRE an internet connection before it can erase any files???

 

[garrett01]

This seems like a bug in the update checker. Could you download and try this version: http://eraser.heidi.ie/download.php?id=292
Here I can erase with no internet or router attached.

You should not have to make firewall changes as eraser will use standard browsing to determine if any updates are needed.