= Sanitization validation
\b[Sanitization validation] decides whether a <data sanitization> outcome is adequate for its intended data-protection objective. It considers the evidence from <sanitization verification>, the suitability of the method and any relevant errors or anomalies. The result is an acceptance or rejection of the sanitization claim.<Guidelines for Media Sanitization by Ramaswamy Chandramouli and Eric A. Hibbard>[Section4.5.2, printedpp.24–25, adequacy decision]{ref}
For an original distinction, suppose a device reports that its selected operation completed successfully, but the method was not suitable for the stipulated recovery capability against which the data was meant to be protected. The operation can have passed its completion check while the sanitization claim is rejected. This is a mismatch between a successful operation and an inadequate objective, not a contradiction between the two assessments.
An invented batch example makes the denominator explicit. Of20 outcomes,19 have successful completion evidence. Of those19, only15 also satisfy the stipulated adequacy criteria. The accepted fraction is then $15/20=75\%$ of the batch, or $15/19\approx78.9\%$ of the successfully completed operations. Reporting only $19/20$ would answer the verification question while leaving the validation question unresolved.
The scope remains the specified target data on the specified medium. A decision about one device does not establish that a separate backup or another copy of the same information has also been sanitized. Validation connects the observed evidence to a bounded protection claim.
Back to article page
