A desktop software tool that lets security professionals securely delete files or entire drives and recover deleted data from damaged storage media in one place.
National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) · Software
Signing in saves it for your whole team, so everyone on your invite link sees the same two entries. Anything you shortlisted while signed out comes with you.
Decomposed from what the description asks for. Nothing added.
Secure Drive Eraser
This module sanitizes entire storage devices and generates tamper-resistant audit reports.
Secure File and Folder Eraser
This module deletes specific files and folders while removing their metadata and residual traces.
Advanced File Carving and Recovery
This module recovers and classifies deleted files from formatted or corrupted storage media.
Reporting and Audit Management
This module generates comprehensive logs and forensic reports for all sanitization and recovery actions.
User Interface Dashboard
This graphical interface provides a unified platform to control all eraser and recovery functions.
Both columns are read off the brief's own wording. Nothing here is inferred from the ministry's name.
The jury will check whether the tool handles multiple storage devices and file systems, provides tamper-resistant audit logs, and successfully recovers fragmented files without metadata.
A jury can still ask about these. Decide them deliberately rather than by accident.
Generated from the brief's own wording and the competition's published rules, never from a guess about what this ministry prefers.
Which specific industry and government data destruction standards must be followed?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Which operating systems the software must run on?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
What specific file signatures the carving module must recognize?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Has any part of this been shown at a previous event, hackathon or college project?
The guidelines are explicit: your solution must not have appeared in any previous event or programme, of any sort. A recycled project is what a team under time pressure reaches for.
The brief asks for secure drive eraser. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26149 itself: This module sanitizes entire storage devices and generates tamper-resistant audit reports. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for secure file and folder eraser. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26149 itself: This module deletes specific files and folders while removing their metadata and residual traces. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for advanced file carving and recovery. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26149 itself: This module recovers and classifies deleted files from formatted or corrupted storage media. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for reporting and audit management. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26149 itself: This module generates comprehensive logs and forensic reports for all sanitization and recovery actions. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for user interface dashboard. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26149 itself: This graphical interface provides a unified platform to control all eraser and recovery functions. The brief asks for it by name.
Where does your data come from: a published source, one you collect, or one you generate?
No dataset is attached to this problem statement, so sourcing it is part of the work and nobody told you that.
Why not use what already exists? Name the closest thing to this that is already running.
A team that has not named the alternative themselves is answering this for the first time in the room.
Which single thing will you demonstrate end to end, start to finish, with nothing skipped?
Ours, not a rule: a narrow thing that fully works survives questioning better than a broad thing that half works. If nobody on the team can name it, that is the finding.
Show me this working: the jury will check whether the tool handles multiple storage devices and file systems, provides tamper-resistant audit logs, and successfully recovers fragmented files without metadata.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.
Each one is quoted from a gap in the brief, not a guess about your team.
No measurable target
The description asks for high recovery rates and comprehensive reporting, but never states a numerical accuracy or performance target.
What the organisers attached, and what the brief assumes you can get.
Same organisation, same year. Reading two of theirs tells you more about what they care about than reading one.