D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] NTFS drive unmountable

 

On 19/07/13 16:50, Philip Whateley wrote:
> Hmm
>
> Still problems: intermittently slow to mount, then wouldn't mount then
> would mount the drive but not the volume etc etc
>
> Took out USB at both ends and then plugged it back in again, it mounted
> (and faster).
>
> So probably the lead. I'll try a new one but I'll also look at
> replacement drive as SMART is detecting bad sectors. At lease I have a
> fighting chance of copying off anything remotely useful.
>
> Many thanks
>
> Phil
>


Can't help but chime in here, particularly as I'm in the middle of
recovering two destroyed external USB Mac drives dropped off by a DJ who
has been a 'bit rough' with them.

Once again (and not for the first time I note) you've been getting
*really* bad advice from the list on this subject, who seem to have some
kind of weakness against disk recovery. Disclaimer: I have done a LOT of
disk recovery, and I'm good at it to the point where literally half of
my mortgage was paid off by some epic recovery jobs in my not so distant
past (failed RAID array holding £1m of architectural material, amongst
others).

First things first - backups are useless until you have tested
restoration, as you've just found out. Only an imbecile (not picking on
you Phil) doesn't test restoration from their backups regularly,
especially if they're stupid enough to only have one, i.e., a half-assed
"plug in an external USB disk every now and then and run some random
tool". If anyone is still doing backups like this - and I expect 90%+ of
those who even bother backing up in the first place fall into this camp
- you're a moron, so stop it.

When your disk goes south, the first thing you must do is stop randomly
hammering it like a fool. Repeatedly re-plugging it, power-cycling it,
hitting it with fdisk -l, remounting it, running badblocks (which
ideally isn't supposed to be run standalone, but as part of fsck, etc)
is obviously just stupid, for reasons I hopefully don't need to
elaborate. Pro-tip: it just exacerbates the problem.

Along with common sense, patience and experience, you will also need
some tools to do this properly: a lot of free disk space,  linux
(obviously) and I personally have a rather expensive write-blocker kit
because all the read-only options in the world you can pass to mount
still won't stop any OS touching the disk anyway - particularly the NTFS
dirty flag, amongst others. Personally, I rip the troubled disk out of
any enclosure first, as they simply compound any issues (particularly
anything made by WD, the most useless external disk vendor who have ever
existed) and hook up the on-disk SATA/SCSI/SAS/IDE/etc port to my write
blocker, which then connects to my recovery box via USB3 or firewire800.
At this point I know that any further write backs to the disk are
physically impossible (this is also a basic requirement for forensic
evidence gathering; any data collected without a hardware write-blocker
is legally inadmissible) and I can proceed to immediately dump the
entire disk to an image file, usually via ddrescue.

The disk can now be disconnected, bagged and tagged and put aside
because after all, self-evidently, only a total moron would continue
experimenting on a failing drive that holds the only copy of their data
right? Right?

>From now on proceed as normal with the tools of your choice, according
to your skill set and budget. The very first thing you need to do is
copy the original image you have just taken, and only work on the copy,
logging every step as you go. Now at this point you may be complaining
that this is unrealistic, as to recover your 1Tb drive you obviously
require at *least* another 3Tb of free space: 1Tb for the original
image, another 1Tb for the copy and you're going to need yet more space
to dump all the recovered data once you can get at it: well, tough. You
should see the space requirements I hit for recovering failed RAID6
arrays as I image individual disks and painstakingly stitch the results
together.

I'm not even going to talk about the original physical disk itself -
SMART errors and other information all require hitting the disk (data
recovery no-no rule 0, in case you haven't noticed) and it's presumably
the data that is valuable to you, not £50 worth of spinning rust. Only a
masochist would continue to try and re-use a failed disk for anything
remotely important after this. Sure, once all your data has been
recovered and you're happy, you could always reinitialize the disk and
throw it in some random box as a completely untrustworthy, throw-away
scratch volume but why tempt fate? Bin it.

There is exactly one of the above requirements/recommendations that you
can ignore: the write-blocker. Mine is an expensive and specialist piece
of kit, and you're not doing evidence gathering for the Police after
all. None of the rest of it is optional: well, technically it is, but
trust me, follow the advice or otherwise in a few more days we can
compare notes. I'll have been paid handsomely by Mr DJ for recovering
95-100% of his rare groove MP3 collection and you'll be crying because
you lost all your data because you insisted on doing stupid things, like
hammering an already failing disk.

Ok, I realise that on my usual passive/aggressive scale this email has
been decidedly more at the sharp end, but, I don't mean to be rude or
offend, just helpful, even if it is in a somewhat blunt and abrasive
way. The tone hasn't been helped because this isn't the first time on
this list I've seen absolutely idiotic "advice" given in response to
disk failure issues. For god's sake, if anything else in life was
exhibiting failures, even less-technical stuff like a door hinge or your
car ignition, would you then decide it's a good idea to repeatedly open
and shut the door again and again, or keep turning the key in the
ignition hoping that against the rules of probability (and physics:
entropy only increases remember), it's suddenly going to get better and
fix itself? Of course not. So why would any moron apply the same line of
thought to a damn hard drive, countless orders of magnitude more complex
and delicate?

And here endeth the lesson. Better put on my asbestos pants once more, I
should think I might get a bit of flak for this :]

Regards


PS: this email was aimed at everyone, but Phil, I genuinely hope you
manage to get your data back one way or the other. Good luck!
PPS: I've just finished restoring the backup GPT label of disk 1 over
the corrupted primary, resurrected the HFS+ partition and am now happily
copying 850Gb of MP3s to safety. Working from an image of course.

-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq