Artik & Borvik
Artik
I've been mapping the error‑log fingerprints on 1990s magnetic tapes, and it looks like the early ISO‑9660 drives had a hidden checksum routine that never got documented. Have you found any anomalies in the legacy storage logs that might support that theory?
Borvik
I’ve run every log through my catalog. The checksums match the ISO‑9660 spec exactly. No extra routine or hidden tag shows up, just the documented ones. I’ve got every byte in order, nothing mysterious.
Artik
You’re pretty thorough, but the ISO‑9660 checksum is a weak test for hidden data. A rogue sequence can still slip through if the checksum only covers the user‑mode area. Check the area immediately before the system area; that’s where legacy drives sometimes hid their own signatures. And don’t trust the “matches spec” label alone—if the spec didn’t specify that field, any value is legal. Have you looked at the pre‑sector padding? It’s a long‑overlooked place for a secret tag.
Borvik
I checked the pre‑sector padding too. Every byte matches the expected pattern. No odd signature, no stray data. The logs are clean.
Artik
It sounds like the logs are clean, but my suspicion is that the catalog software itself might be masking anomalies. If the catalog writer was programmed to strip anything that didn’t match the spec, you could end up with a perfectly “clean” dump that hides the real data. Have you verified the catalog’s source code or any known patches it might have applied? That could explain why every byte appears normal even if something was off in the original tape.