I'm breaking down, /wsr/. My 2 TB hdd full of illicit shit

Yes, they'll look at your shit.

Is it worth enough to go out to the store and buy another drive and backup the fucked up to and then go through a couple hours of trying to fuck with it to get your data back?.

If so go buy another drive and then come back.

File: 10819091-Businessman-with-thoughts-of-suicide-Stock-Photo-noose-depression.jpg (126KB, 861x1300px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 861x1300px

>>181728
Is there anyone who won't?
>>181729
That's the thing, I can't back it up anymore because my dumbass let it shit itself and now I can't access it anymore. I'm fine with getting another HDD but I need to repair this one first.

>>181730

So it won't start up at all?.

>>181731
Yes. It's asking me to format it to access the data and keeps connecting and disconnecting so I can't get a stable connection.

>>181717
Define "illicit shit".

Anything other than CP = meh, they have probably seen it before.... Unless it's depictions of consensual sex in the missionary position for the sole purpose of procreation = They, know, an hero ASAP

>>181735

Is it an external?

>>181737
Nah, internal. When internal, it MIGHT detect it, then it was was gone. With USB to SATA connection (multiple different cables tried) what I described above happens.
>>181736
Mainly shameful fetish shit, candids I took myself, and programs/documents. There's several thousand individual files so they're not gonna go through them all, will they?

File: 1318813169218.jpg (23KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 569x428px

>>181738
>Mainly shameful fetish shit
I too get off on pictures of dogs in pantyhoses, licking spray cans covered in nutella in green rooms.
If it's not CP, thy probably won't care, or bat an eye

>candids I took myself, and programs/documents
See above, you naughty, naught boy.

>they're not gonna go through them all, will they?
Not manually, but they will try to rescue as many files as they can.

In any case: you never see social media posts from data recovery companies saying "lol, look what we found on this fags HDD",confidentiality is kind of a must when you're dealing with shit like this.

Secondly. you got to ask yourself "will I die if I don't have this in my life?". From what I gather it's just porn..

>inb4: OMG IT'S NOT "JUST" PORN; IT'S MY LIFE'S WORK!!!!

>>181742
>Not manually, but they will try to rescue as many files as they can.
Will they see the thumbnails, then, or just the names of the files/folders similar to when I'm moving files on Windows? I forgot to mention while there's no CP, there IS copious amounts of jailbait NONNUDE pics/vids.
>OMG IT'S NOT "JUST" PORN; IT'S MY LIFE'S WORK!!!!
;_; read me like a book

>>181744

What you should be asking yourself is, "is the content worth the risk of jail time?"

Even non-nude jailbait is sketchy as fuck, slippery slope and all that.

Bin it, deal with it, don't be so lame in the future.

Run a RAID, or back up your shit next time.

>>181773
Trashing it is not an option; I NEED my shit, man. Is there a service that doesn't look at my shit?

>>181773
>Run a RAID, or back up your shit next time.
RAID does not provide data security, it provides device availability.
RAID is not a substitute for backup.

1) Create RAID6 disk array
2) dd of=/path/to/disk/image if=/dev/usb_stick
3) your file is obliterated over four disks and two parity sets

1) Create daily backup job
2) dd of=/path/to/disk/image if=/dev/usb_stick
3) "Oh, shit.", restore from backup

inb4 "so use RAID and don't be a dumbass": if I'm already not a dumbass, why do I need RAID?

>>181775

No.

I mean, they won't look at ALL of your shit but there is always the possibility of something shady coming to light.

Have you tried running a live session of a Linux distro, and seeing if that has more luck? It probably won't be any more successful than Windows if the drive is seriously fucked, but you sound desperate enough to grab at anything.

>>181784
>I mean, they won't look at ALL of your shit but there is always the possibility of something shady coming to light.
There's thousands of folders (it doesn't have an OS on it) and tens of thousands of files so, like I asked before, would they just see the filenames and get suspicious if they see some shit like "Hot teen squirts" or did they move each folder/file individually and just see every damn thing?

>>181781

What is RAID1?

>>181784
>Have you tried running a live session of a Linux distro, and seeing if that has more luck?
I haven't and I doubt it would do any good. I mean, my BIOS recognizes the drive but whenever I'm on the desktop or trying to get to it, it all goes to shit.

>>181790

If your BIOS recognises the drive that means that the interface is working, so there is a read issue with the drive.

I doubt a Linux session would help, but I would still try it, because you're really only losing time ... but that's me. Leave no stone unturned.

>>181790
My 3tb barracuda "died" about a month ago. Not sure exactly what happened, but bios wouldn't recognize it unless I set it to legacy IDE mode, and trying to boot windows would cause it to hang (probably trying to fix the drive).

Linux worked great, had to give it a few tries before it was recognized, but most of the stuff was intact. Just make sure you give it proper cooling, it was overheating during that time.

>>181796
Alright, I'll give it a shot. You're right, it's def worth a try.
>>181799
Proper cooling? Do you recommend I use a USB to SATA cable so that it isn't enclosed?

Also, is it worth it to run Seatools or some shit if I get access to the drive? or should I frantically back that shit up?

>>181787
>hot teen squirts

if I repaired PCs and I saw that I would think you're the most vanilla guy in existance.

If your stuff is hidden beneath at least a few layers of folders you should be fine. They aren't going to be searching your files, or anything, they won't investigate every directory.

>>181800
Try to get data first, and repair the disk later.

As for cooling, I took off the side panels and put a big fan next to the disk bay.

>>181787

That depends on the size of the operation, and the workload.

It will be mostly automated once they set it up, but they will have to "work on it" to get it to function, and that means they'll be looking at some of your shit during that time.

>>181800

>or should I frantically back that shit up?

Most definitely. At the first opportunity, irreplaceable files first and then the rest.

>>181802
>If your stuff is hidden beneath at least a few layers of folders you should be fine
I guess I should explain how I have my shit:
First is a folder with an icon that's blank and also some alt+whatever text that made it so there's the appearance of no text for the folder name. Next is six ambiguous folders named like, Docs, Pics, Vids, etc. In the Pictures folder, there's a gorillion folders, one of which is a folder named pics that has IRL photos of chicks and contains several thousand images. Will they be able to find shit on me based on that?
>>181803
>Try to get data first, and repair the disk later.
Gotcha
>As for cooling, I took off the side panels and put a big fan next to the disk bay.
Using a bulky gaming laptop, famme. I might just have to leave the laptop at an angle.
>>181805
>That depends on the size of the operation, and the workload...
Shit, then there is a risk.
>Most definitely.
Gotcha x2

>>181809
In 99% of cases nobody will find your stuff. You can never be 100% sure but I would probably feel safe in handing it over, especially considering you don't have any legit CP on your disk.

>>181789
1) Create RAID1 disk array
2) dd of=/path/to/disk/image if=/dev/usb_stick
3) your file is obliterated over two disks and no parity sets

Do you wanna go again? This is fun.

i think OP has CP on his drive, it's pretty obvious.
of course he would not outright say it here, he'd be a fool.
but i think based on context here there wouldn't be anything to be afraid of if he was not in possession of something potentially going to put him in jail.

>>181802
>>181809
Oh, FFS, you're both idiots.

One of the great things about looking at the disk like a block device is that it completely ignores the directory structure. A JPEG that hashes to something on the IWF list hashes the same wherever it is in the directory structure, because they're not even looking at directories, they're looking at the file at sector 1253342.

The only question that is actually relevant is:
- have you broken the law?

If the answer is no, then you're fine. If the answer is yes, then you are not fine, because data recovery companies recover your data, and part of that is looking at it to see if it's recovered or not.

>>181813

>RAID1
>your file is obliterated over two disks and no parity sets

Nope. RAID1 mirrors your data over two or more disks.

File: sM77zRs.jpg (36KB, 709x765px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 709x765px

>>181820
Fuck me. I'm sure I saved at least one thing that's illegal on the drive.

>>181822
Yeah, and?

You just told it to overwrite the file, so it happily overwrites both copies.

This is why RAID provides availability, not security. If you want security, you need backup, not RAID.

>>181825

The OP had a hard drive fail, RAID1 would retain the data on the other drive in the event of a drive fail.

Nobody "overwrote" any data, Anon. The drive failed.

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (105KB, 1905x1080px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1905x1080px

>>181830
Yeah, and?

OP goes and implements your retarded idea, has an OS fail, and gets his filesystem scribbled.

Now he can't restore from backup because he doesn't have one, but hey, on the bright side he does have two exact copies of the same mangled data.

RAID is not backup.

If you only have the space to do one, then you want backup.

>>181781
>RAID is not a substitute for backup.

Most people don't need backups but drive redundancy, especially for porn, animu, and their lolcat collection.

>RAID does not provide data security, it provides device availability.

IT brainlet detected. There are other use cases other than the enterprise one.

For the linux distro, will Ubuntu work? I'm command-line illiterate, pretty much.

>>181833

OP's failed hard drive wasn't a system disk, it was storage. He should RAID his storage if it means so much to him.

Of course he should back up his system, when did I advocate differently?

>>181846

Yeah, any. Ubuntu will be fine.

>>181850
Alright, I'm gonna try booting to Ubunta from the USB and see if my other laptop recognizes the HDD when I put it in internally.

>>181845
>Most people need drive redundancy, especially for porn, animu, and their lolcat collection.
You mean data backup.

You'll understand the difference the first time you delete the wrong directory, and can't get it back because your controller deleted both copies, just like you told it to.

>>181848
>when did I advocate differently?
When you said RAID was a form of backup, which it isn't.

>>181824
there you have it, you are in possesion of CP.
you are fucked, so just trash the shit or throw it into a fire. next time don't fuck up and properly backup your stuff so you wont have to lose all your precious creepshots you fucking pedophile.

>>181858
>CP
I meant other things like torrented copyrighted material and the aforementioned jailbait. No need to throw accusations :^)

>>181855

>When you said RAID was a form of backup, which it isn't.

Weird, I distinctly remember typing "Run a RAID, or back up your shit next time". Clearly separating RAID and "backup" as they are not the same thing.

Try looking up RAID1. It isn't a backup, but it does stop you losing your data in the event of a drive failure.

>>181855
>You'll understand the difference the first time you delete the wrong directory, and can't get it back because your controller deleted both copies, just like you told it to.

No, I mean RAID. You'll understand the difference the first time you delete the wrong directory, and can't get it back because your auto backup software deleted both copies, just like you told it to.

If you're stupid enough to delete the wrong folders and continue using said drive so file recovery is impossible then you're stupid enough to fuck up a back up too. Most data lost is due to drive failures which can be guarded against by RAID5/6.

Protip: Restore points can recover accidentally deleted files if you find yourself doing it so much.

>>181869
>>181773
>Prevent Z by doing X or Y
>You only need to do one of X or Y
Implying that either X or Y will do as good a job at preventing Z.

Now in this case, X="backup", Y="RAID", and Z="losing all your shit".

Seeing as you're now saying that X is in fact not as good as Y (>>181869), can we please agree that your initial statement was in error?

>>181869
"Disk drive cleanly dropping dead" is only one of innumerable ways you can lose your data, and this is the one-and-only scenario where RAID1 protects your data. Say instead of cleanly dropping dead, the disk instead just sometimes returns the wrong data? What then? 50:50 chance, your only good copy gets overwritten with your bad copy. Say one disk just stops doing certain writes? When you need to read it, 50:50 chance your new data gets overwritten with old data.

Versioned backup will catch every one of these issues, and loads more.

The reason RAID doesn't work in all these scenarios where backup does, is because "protecting your data" is not what RAID is for: what it's for is getting more performance out of inexpensive disks (RAID0), or ensuring you're not left without a disk array in the case where one or more disks fail (RAID1,5,6).

RAID1 is not designed or intended to protect your data, RAID1 very rarely does protect your data, and if you're using it to protect your data, I suggest you immediately switch to a single disk and a backup.

>>181887
>the first time you delete the wrong directory, and can't get it back because your auto backup software deleted both copies, just like you told it to.
In that scenario, it'll only be missing from the latest backup, and still there in EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE OTHERS.

I'm telling you where you're wrong mainly for your benefit: by writing that you just showed everyone you don't know what you're talking about.

>>181891

>"Disk drive cleanly dropping dead" is only one of innumerable ways you can lose your data, and this is the one-and-only scenario where RAID1 protects your data.

Exactly why I recommended it to the OP, as this is exactly what just happened to him.

>Seeing as you're now saying that X is in fact not as good as Y

Didn't say that.

>RAID1 is not designed or intended to protect your data

Except in the case of a drive failure, for which it is expressly designed.

.

Here's a scenario, you have a sequential backup system set to run at end of day, during that day you save 50GB of shit to your drive, it fails two hours before the backup runs ... you've lost that 50GB of shit and all of the day's saved data.

Another scenario, you have a RAID1 set up on your data disks, you save 50GB of shit to your drive, the RAID1 mirrors your drives so you have two lots of 50GB of shit (one on each drive), one drive fails, you've lost all ... oh wait ... you haven't lost shit. You even haven't lost all the days saved data.

>>181895
>In that scenario, it'll only be missing from the latest backup, and still there in EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE OTHERS.

Home users and enterprise users are different. Having numerous snapshots only makes sense in a business setting. Porn and anime doesn't need such protection.

>>181924
You get it automatically anyway.

No backup doesn't do snapshots, because not doing them takes more space and more effort.

Which you'd know, I guess, if you had any experience of them whatsoever.

>>181905
>it fails two hours before the backup runs
Any decent backup runs all the time. Time Machine, for example, is designed for retards, and would have saved all that whilst you wrote it.

By all means, keep showing everyone you don't know what you're talking about.

>>181987

>By all means, keep showing everyone you don't know what you're talking about.

Says the Anon that doesn't know how RAID1 works

Also, "showing everyone", on an anonymous Taiwanese crocheting board? Are you serious?

File: 84b.jpg (41KB, 360x480px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 360x480px

>>181717
First, try DDRescue on linux.

Second, i remember an episode of Linus tech tips in which their array failed and the company they used didn't check the recovered data in the first but that was a different type of issue, you may want to look for discrete data recovery services like the ones used by legal agency's in which the data its extremely confidential, you can also get a legal contract saying they wont divulge to the authority's what they found(and if they do the evidence would be null)

As for the heated discussion between Raid and Backup, A RaidZ on a FreeNas server and a CrashPlan account its a good combination of the two but if you're paranoid of saving your data on a external server the RaidZ has plenty of way to prevent data corruption compared to a regular Raid5 and it also supports snapshots and Rsync jobs.

>>182107
>First, try DDRescue on linux.
Is it alright if I try DDRescue from a bootable USB?

>Second, i remember an episode of Linus tech tips...
I'm not really sure where to start with that. All the data recovery specialists seem the same to me.

And thanks for the reply, my guy.

>>182107
Do you remember which video that was?

>>182138
>>182122

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSrnXgAmK8k

The service they used was called WeRecoverData, if you check their Privacy Policy they seem to be alright and they also work for a lot of big corporations which means that they handle confidential data all the time.

>>182146
And what about the illicit shit?

>>182146
>WeRecoverData
We may also release your information when we believe release is appropriate to comply with the law, enforce our site policies, or protect ours or others rights, property, or safety.

>>182324
fug :'^)

File: image.jpg (42KB, 250x350px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 250x350px

>>182049
>Says the Anon that doesn't know how RAID1 works
>>181905
>Except in the case of a drive failure, for which it is expressly designed.
Shiggidy diggidy

Is there someone on craigslist or some shit I can ask to fix my HDD?