HDD GURU FORUMS
http://forum.hddguru.com/

Data Recovery Imager Comparisons
http://forum.hddguru.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35267
Page 1 of 1

Author:  lcoughey [ April 20th, 2017, 8:41 ]
Post subject:  Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

For those who might be interested and aren't already aware, I've logged the results imaging the same Toshiba hard drive supplied by Spildit using various data recovery imagers.

Hardware Data Recovery Imager Comparrison

Author:  databack [ June 13th, 2017, 3:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Missing Atola!!!!

Author:  LarrySabo [ June 13th, 2017, 8:50 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

My results with the DFL-SRP (DDP) are discussed in Spildit's forum, and were bizarre, to say the least. I ran three tests; the first under Windows 10 was cancelled because it appears that DFL-SRP is not compatible with Win10, even though it seemed to be working normally. (DFL does not claim it's Win10-compatible.) The second was run on a PC running Windows 7 and completed in 11 hrs with zero errors -- not plausible. It was using using a scavenged 250GB drive as a target disk. The third was run on the same PC with output to a file rather than a hard drive, and it completed in just over 11 hrs and had 81 unreadable sectors -- again, not plausible.

Spildit has speculated on the causes for these results in the thread cited above and I returned the patient disk, the clone from the second test, and the image from the third to him for analysis, but the package has still not been received after 4 and a half weeks. Can it get any weirder?

Author:  data-medics [ June 13th, 2017, 12:56 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

databack wrote:
Missing Atola!!!!


I wouldn't say he's really "missing" it.

Author:  Spildit [ June 13th, 2017, 13:22 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Well, i think that as soon as I recieve the package i will be able to confirm if the image/clone done with DFL is indeed a "perfect" clone of the original drive or not.

If the DF clone is indeed a "perfect" clone (meaning it did get all sectors without error) then this will simply mean that the drive for some reason allowed a perfect read of all sectors on that particular time when it was cloned. This is not that rare with those Toshiba models with "damaged" surface/heads. Sometimes once in a while they will allow a perfect full read of all of the surface. I've saw that more than once with Victoria surface scans on Toshiba 2.5 drives of the same series.

The "strange" thing is that for this particular test drive we were assuminig the existence of media/platter damage instead of dying faulty heads.

So there is the possibility that DFL is not correctly stating the sectors that it's really copying out without defect to the image file/clone...

Only way to be 100% sure now is to compare the image file of DFL with the image file of HRT. Also i intend to re-do the image with HRT-DRE as soon as i recieve the drive back.

Regards.

Author:  Amarbir[CDR-Labs] [ June 25th, 2017, 5:50 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Well,
I have Received a MRT Ultra And I Have Already shot a Unboxing Video With My Inputs To It .I Would Then Be Doing 2 More Videos On That One Setup An Initial Registration and second one is working around with the tool .I have all the tools pc3k , dfl and mrt later on i am planning to do a real life comparison of the tools .I do not like what you folks are doing .What you are doing is that you are taking a degraded drive and then trying to image it on different tools without understanding that the drive is getting worse by every attempt .I would not be doing a comparison like this but its going to be different .

Some Videos On My youtube Channel -> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbIeLF ... TQu_QSCsgQ

Author:  Spildit [ June 25th, 2017, 10:45 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Amarbir[CDR-Labs] wrote:
(...)I have all the tools pc3k , dfl and mrt later on i am planning to do a real life comparison of the tools (...)


Sure, we already know that you are better than anyone else !

Amarbir[CDR-Labs] wrote:
(...)I do not like what you folks are doing .What you are doing is that you are taking a degraded drive and then trying to image it on different tools without understanding that the drive is getting worse by every attempt .I would not be doing a comparison like this but its going to be different .
(...)


The one who doesn't seam to understand is you. My test drive was not getting worse by every attempt. It was a stable drive with a patch of bad sectors on some spots of the platter. Very typical on those Toshiba models as explained. You could image it for hours and the heads wouldn't die, even on the same damaged spots, as show on the "test". Maybe you should start recoverying more data on those Toshiba first so that you will know better what to expect from them ?

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Author:  LarrySabo [ November 3rd, 2017, 9:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

LarrySabo wrote:
... I returned the patient disk, the clone from the second test, and the image from the third to him for analysis, but the package has still not been received after 4 and a half weeks. Can it get any weirder?


That shipment was just returned yesterday, stamped "Not reclaimed." It appears to have been opened by Portugal customs. I'm ready to ship it again, with "Signature required" this time, if there is still interest in the project.

Author:  pclab [ November 3rd, 2017, 10:11 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Not Reclaimed could be that the Address was wrong...
Even if Customs check it, it should pass...

Author:  LarrySabo [ November 3rd, 2017, 10:53 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Yes, I thought of that, but the address was a copy/paste from the one given to me. I've PM'd Spildit a scan of the outgoing address label and the customs label, so we'll see what he thinks went wrong.

Author:  Spildit [ November 4th, 2017, 11:17 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

Hi there !!!

Yes, there is still interest in this. I didn't check your WD drive yet as i did put it aside for a while but it would be lovely to get the initial drive to compare.

I will reply to your PM on the oracle.

Also the address should be exactly the same as the one used on the other package that i did recieve so i don't know what went wrong with the 1st shipping.

:shock: :shock: :shock:

I'm willing to pay you the shipping costs to get that initial drive back and i will also compare the image that you send me on the other "package",

Regards.

Author:  craig6928 [ November 4th, 2017, 18:23 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

databack wrote:
Missing Atola!!!!


im surprise that atola did not get tested out also.


these tools are good for imaging and recovering.


also there no data compass :mrgreen:


it would also be good if we knew what pc specs where used for the testing purpose.

Author:  LarrySabo [ March 13th, 2018, 17:12 ]
Post subject:  Re: Data Recovery Imager Comparisons

To add to the weirdness, it appears that my DFL gear did in fact manage to recover all of the data, according to Spildit's analysis of my results: http://www.hddoracle.com/viewtopic.php?p=16349#p16349 :shock: :shock: :shock:

The drive has been forwarded to @maximus for testing using hddsuperclone. His results begin here: http://www.hddoracle.com/viewtopic.php?p=16295#p16295



LarrySabo wrote:
LarrySabo wrote:
... I returned the patient disk, the clone from the second test, and the image from the third to him for analysis, but the package has still not been received after 4 and a half weeks. Can it get any weirder?


That shipment was just returned yesterday, stamped "Not reclaimed." It appears to have been opened by Portugal customs. I'm ready to ship it again, with "Signature required" this time, if there is still interest in the project.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/