OT: restoring a computer MS way

On Sat, 24 May 2014 07:35:47 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
>> ANYTHING else.
>
>Don't believe that for a millisecond, like the key to your front door,
>security is relative. Nothing is, or ever has been, absolutely secure.
>There is no such thing security, connected or not.
>
>There is indeed an ability to do an "air-gap hack", readily available
>and in use:
>
>http://www.policymic.com/articles/79141/the-nsa-can-t-hack-you-if-you-don-t-have-internet-this-has-now-been-debunked
>
>NSA's ANT division is capable of, and has implanted surveillance
>hardware and software in almost every piece of computer hardware, from
>USB plugs, to hard drives, to serial ports, plugs, mice, keyboards, etc,
>that will provide air-gap bridging from a totally unconnected computer.
>
>DAGS "COTTONMOUTH-I" for starters:
>
>https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/03/cottonmouth-i_n.html
But you need to be a "high interest target" for one of those
institutions to invest the time and resources to "plant" one of those
devices on your computer - and technically, when one is planted in
your computer you ARE connected.

On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:32:38 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

>On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>>>> when needed is foolish.
>>>
>>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>>> something like a server's active directory.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Finally got my computer restored.
>>
>> Two things were problematic.
>>
>> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
>> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>>
>> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>>
>> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
>still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.

It's taken me five days (or more) to do a clean install, by the time I
got everything working and tested, but it's never taken me more than a
couple of hours to do a restore from a backup. That would piss me
off, no end.

On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>>> when needed is foolish.
>>
>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>> something like a server's active directory.
>>
>>
>
> Finally got my computer restored.
>
> Two things were problematic.
>
> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>
> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>
> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>
>
>

Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.

On 5/24/2014 9:18 AM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/24/2014 9:12 AM, Swingman wrote:
>> On 5/24/2014 9:02 AM, Leon wrote:
>>> As you have said, it is all relative. The only true way to be secure is
>>> to never place your thoughts anywhere other than in you head.
>>
>> Not even that:
>>
>> http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trending-now/technological-breakthrough-allows-scientists-read-mind-183724270.html
>>
>>
>>
>> And this is just the second decade of the 21st century. Just wait. ;)
>>
>>
>
>
> I was waiting for some one to mention that. I keep all the data in my
> head encrypted. I store the password on my computer. ;~)

GIGO! <g,d&r>

And, the inevitable read/write errors go a long way to explaining why
even the scorekeeper can't win a game of dominoes. ;)

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

RE: Subject

Not to swift when it comes to puters, but have found the
following works for me.

Most of the programs I use provide a way to get to DOS.

Once in DOS, the following command line works for me:

dos "xcopy d:\checks\*.* F:\checks /s /v /m" end 1

where CHECKS is a directory and F: is front of puter plug in thumb
drive.

SFWIW, "F" is a backup of a backup.

Simple, but it works for me and is current.

Lew

On 05/24/2014 05:04 AM, Leon wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
>>> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than
>>> keeping your data in house.
>>
>> One word - Target...
>
>
> Actually if you are connected to the internet you are a target. And that
> goes up significantly if you use Windows.
>
The Chinese government banned the use of Windows 8 on any government
hardware. They said any other OS would do...

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> It is always something and your situation was one of many possible
> problems that can crop up.
> The last time I had a successful full recovery from a backup was when
> the back up and restore began at the c:/ prompt. That was way before
> Win 95. I wonder how many 3.5" floppies it would take to back up 150
> Gig? LOL
>

Probably more disks than AOL mailed out!

Can you imagine how long it will take? It'll probably be faster just to
print out the bit patterns on a modern laser printer and scan them in
again. *g*

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

"Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
>> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than
>> keeping your data in house.
>
> One word - Target...


Actually if you are connected to the internet you are a target. And that
goes up significantly if you use Windows.

On 5/29/2014 9:06 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/29/2014 7:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:32:38 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has
>>>>>> to be
>>>>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a
>>>>>> restore
>>>>>> when needed is foolish.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>>>>> something like a server's active directory.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Finally got my computer restored.
>>>>
>>>> Two things were problematic.
>>>>
>>>> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
>>>> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>>>>
>>>> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>>>>
>>>> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
>>> still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.
>>
>> It's taken me five days (or more) to do a clean install, by the time I
>> got everything working and tested, but it's never taken me more than a
>> couple of hours to do a restore from a backup. That would piss me
>> off, no end.
>>
>
> Well the reason that it took 5 days was that I lost 3 days while I went
> to my sons graduation from college.

Well you get a pass. ;~) You can't count those days.
And a great reason to be away.


>
> Magna cum Laude... in computer science. A chip off the old block.

LOL. My son was Suma cum Laude in accountancy. He is my retirement
plan. ;~)

>
> So that was Fri, Sat, Sunday lost.
> I forgot to mention that in previous posts.
>
> The big problem was that I needed an update, once I had that the restore
> worked. But I had to rebuild the o/s again, since the first time MS
> did not partition the GPT partitions for some reason... no idea why it
> skipped that process.
>

It is always something and your situation was one of many possible
problems that can crop up.
The last time I had a successful full recovery from a backup was when
the back up and restore began at the c:/ prompt. That was way before
Win 95. I wonder how many 3.5" floppies it would take to back up 150
Gig? LOL

On Fri, 23 May 2014 21:45:37 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>RE: Subject
>
>Not to swift when it comes to puters, but have found the
>following works for me.
>
>Most of the programs I use provide a way to get to DOS.
>
>Once in DOS, the following command line works for me:
>
>dos "xcopy d:\checks\*.* F:\checks /s /v /m" end 1
>
>where CHECKS is a directory and F: is front of puter plug in thumb
>drive.
>
>SFWIW, "F" is a backup of a backup.
>
>Simple, but it works for me and is current.
>
Be *very* careful with that. I don't know about W7 but in earlier
versions of Win, XCOPY totally screwed the short->long file name
translations.

On Friday, May 23, 2014 8:32:57 AM UTC-5, woodchucker wrote:
> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and=20
>=20
> won't restore. NICE!!!
>=20
>=20
>=20
> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will=20
>=20
> restore that part.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new=
=20
>=20
> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and=
=20
>=20
> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring=
=20
>=20
> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation=20
>=20
> Monday or Tuesday.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
>=20
> Jeff


Two things:

You can call MS Tech Support and get a good Key (I had to do that each time=
I upgraded my hardware on my copy of XP, )

You can move to Mac and be done with the hassle of playing with MS, but you=
r expenses go up

The third, and for me the best, option is to move to Linux, you do not have=
the hassle of dealing with MS and you get all the security of Mac (actuall=
y even more) without the expense.

The following is no indorsement, but purely personal preference

Ubuntu, and its many spin offs, is much to cumbersome and has a "Tool Set" =
(read Control Panel in MS) that is both difficult to use and somewhat limit=
ed.

Fedora (Red Hat's user version) is even worse at being user friendly than U=
buntu

PCLinusOS is not the largest distro out there, but I love its Tool Set.

Whatever one any of you decides to look at, they all have a "LiveCD," (whic=
h you can install from, so you do not need to do two downloads) which you c=
an download, burn to a CD/DVD, load, run, look at, evaluate and decide, wit=
hout ever having written anything to your HD. If you like it, install it.=
If not, circular file.

Just a thought

Deb

On 5/24/2014 8:05 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:

> PCLinusOS is not the largest distro out there, but I love its Tool Set.

I know Sketchup can be run under WINE, but would be interested in
hearing anyone's experience in doing so.

Also plugins would probably have to be modified since Ruby's text format
is different than Unix, IIRC?

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 5/24/2014 9:12 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 5/24/2014 9:02 AM, Leon wrote:
>> As you have said, it is all relative. The only true way to be secure is
>> to never place your thoughts anywhere other than in you head.
>
> Not even that:
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trending-now/technological-breakthrough-allows-scientists-read-mind-183724270.html
>
>
> And this is just the second decade of the 21st century. Just wait. ;)
>
>


I was waiting for some one to mention that. I keep all the data in my
head encrypted. I store the password on my computer. ;~)

On 5/24/2014 9:05 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
> On Friday, May 23, 2014 8:32:57 AM UTC-5, woodchucker wrote:
>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>
>>
>>
>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>
>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>
>>
>>
>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>
>> restore that part.
>>
>>
>>
>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>
>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
>>
>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
>>
>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>
>>
>>
>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>
>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jeff
>
>
> Two things:
>
> You can call MS Tech Support and get a good Key (I had to do that each time I upgraded my hardware on my copy of XP, )
>
> You can move to Mac and be done with the hassle of playing with MS, but your expenses go up
>
> The third, and for me the best, option is to move to Linux, you do not have the hassle of dealing with MS and you get all the security of Mac (actually even more) without the expense.
>
> The following is no indorsement, but purely personal preference
>
> Ubuntu, and its many spin offs, is much to cumbersome and has a "Tool Set" (read Control Panel in MS) that is both difficult to use and somewhat limited.
>
> Fedora (Red Hat's user version) is even worse at being user friendly than Ubuntu
>
> PCLinusOS is not the largest distro out there, but I love its Tool Set.
>
> Whatever one any of you decides to look at, they all have a "LiveCD," (which you can install from, so you do not need to do two downloads) which you can download, burn to a CD/DVD, load, run, look at, evaluate and decide, without ever having written anything to your HD. If you like it, install it. If not, circular file.
>
> Just a thought
>
> Deb
>

I am a unix/linux guy. But I still use MS. Just way more available.
The problem with Linux is that there are too many distros.
Originally everyone thought it would solve the UNIX flavor problem.
But every company and every body and their brothers, sisters and idiot
brothers decided to do it differently. And to some extent that has
killed Linux.. The original goal is gone..

Stuff that works on one distro doesn't work on the other.
I can't be bothered ... My son loves Linux.. But even he keeps a copy of
MS around because he knows it's a necessary evil... Either that or
Apple, and he does not like Apple.

--
Jeff

On 5/23/2014 12:23 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2014 10:07:57 -0400, "G. Ross" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> woodchucker wrote:
>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>
>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>
>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>> restore that part.
>>>
>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>
>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>
>>>
>> What kind of backup do you have? I have put a new disk in a external
>> housing connected to a usb port and restored a complete disk to it
>> using an Acronis backup which was on another external disk. In other
>> words would clone a new disk from the backup files. This was a few
>> years back and I no longer use Acronis because of other issues.
> They've thrown a new curve into the game now on new computers - EFI
> (not electronic fuel injection - extensible firmware Interface) which
> is part and parcel of the Globaly Unit IDentifier (GUID) standard and
> GPT (GUID Partition Table) spec that allows you to excede 2tb per
> partition.
>
> I've found I can clone a complete drive with certain software (run
> from bootable CD or stick) but I have not been able to image
> partitions and restore them with any of 5 or 6 products I have tried.
> Will try to image the complete drive and see what happens.
>
> The EFI and system (c:) partitions alone just will NOT restore.
>

Exactly

--
Jeff

On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:

> The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
> ANYTHING else.

Don't believe that for a millisecond, like the key to your front door,
security is relative. Nothing is, or ever has been, absolutely secure.
There is no such thing security, connected or not.

There is indeed an ability to do an "air-gap hack", readily available
and in use:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/79141/the-nsa-can-t-hack-you-if-you-don-t-have-internet-this-has-now-been-debunked

NSA's ANT division is capable of, and has implanted surveillance
hardware and software in almost every piece of computer hardware, from
USB plugs, to hard drives, to serial ports, plugs, mice, keyboards, etc,
that will provide air-gap bridging from a totally unconnected computer.

DAGS "COTTONMOUTH-I" for starters:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/03/cottonmouth-i_n.html


--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 5/23/2014 8:59 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>>
>>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>>
>>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>>> restore that part.
>>>>
>>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer
>>>> and
>>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try
>>>> restoring
>>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>>
>>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
>>> data up on the cloud.
>>>
>>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>>
>>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
>>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>>
>>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
>> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
>> your data - - - - -
>>
>
> Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
> any time with any one anywhere.
>
> Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.
>
> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
> of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
> your data in house.
>
>
>
>

Yea like Clare says.

I don't trust anyone. I know what these clowns do... I'm in the business.
They talk the security game, but so many times they have holes that a
big oil tanker could come through.

The business usually has security in mind, but it's the people below
that create bypasses because they don't like jumping through hoops every
time.

I could explain one of the biggest ways I have seen, but I don't wish to
describe it here. It's a back door that I often see someone put in so
they don't have to go through a process.. But it creates a huge hole..

Trust.. Trust no one with your data.

I keep a thumb drive in the safe deposit box.. but even that is
outdated. I also keep an external in the safe deposit box.. And that IS
always way out of date.

The most important backup is one that is accessible. So I keep one at
home..

--
Jeff

On 5/24/2014 12:45 AM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> RE: Subject
>
> Not to swift when it comes to puters, but have found the
> following works for me.
>
> Most of the programs I use provide a way to get to DOS.
>
> Once in DOS, the following command line works for me:
>
> dos "xcopy d:\checks\*.* F:\checks /s /v /m" end 1
>
> where CHECKS is a directory and F: is front of puter plug in thumb
> drive.
>
> SFWIW, "F" is a backup of a backup.
>
> Simple, but it works for me and is current.
>
> Lew
>
>

I use external hard drives, so I keep multiple backups and have versioning.

Thanks.

My data is safe, my restore is not. I did not know MS tied their backup
to the firmware. I had read how finally MS got there shit together on
backups and tried it.. it worked on the same computer... didn't know it
would not transfer to the same model w/diff firmware.

The data fortunately is still there. But I can't restore an image.
I have some very important databases out there, and it means I must
build from scratch and then restore them... just a big pain in the ass.

All at a time, when the town contacted me and wants to audit my
volleyball records.

--
Jeff

On 5/29/2014 7:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:32:38 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>>>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>>>>> when needed is foolish.
>>>>
>>>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>>>> something like a server's active directory.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Finally got my computer restored.
>>>
>>> Two things were problematic.
>>>
>>> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
>>> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>>>
>>> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>>>
>>> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
>> still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.
>
> It's taken me five days (or more) to do a clean install, by the time I
> got everything working and tested, but it's never taken me more than a
> couple of hours to do a restore from a backup. That would piss me
> off, no end.
>

Well the reason that it took 5 days was that I lost 3 days while I went
to my sons graduation from college.

Magna cum Laude... in computer science. A chip off the old block.

So that was Fri, Sat, Sunday lost.
I forgot to mention that in previous posts.

The big problem was that I needed an update, once I had that the restore
worked. But I had to rebuild the o/s again, since the first time MS
did not partition the GPT partitions for some reason... no idea why it
skipped that process.


--
Jeff

On 5/24/2014 9:02 AM, Leon wrote:
> As you have said, it is all relative. The only true way to be secure is
> to never place your thoughts anywhere other than in you head.

Not even that:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trending-now/technological-breakthrough-allows-scientists-read-mind-183724270.html

And this is just the second decade of the 21st century. Just wait. ;)


--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 5/24/2014 7:35 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
>> ANYTHING else.
>
> Don't believe that for a millisecond, like the key to your front door,
> security is relative. Nothing is, or ever has been, absolutely secure.
> There is no such thing security, connected or not.
>
> There is indeed an ability to do an "air-gap hack", readily available
> and in use:
>
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/79141/the-nsa-can-t-hack-you-if-you-don-t-have-internet-this-has-now-been-debunked
>
>
> NSA's ANT division is capable of, and has implanted surveillance
> hardware and software in almost every piece of computer hardware, from
> USB plugs, to hard drives, to serial ports, plugs, mice, keyboards, etc,
> that will provide air-gap bridging from a totally unconnected computer.
>
> DAGS "COTTONMOUTH-I" for starters:
>
> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/03/cottonmouth-i_n.html
>
>


Now you have done it, some here may shave to start memorizing their data
and not use a computer at all for total security. ;~)

As you have said, it is all relative. The only true way to be secure is
to never place your thoughts anywhere other than in you head. Don't use
a recorder, computer, telephone, paper, etc., if you have something to hide.

But for the rest of us that don't have a photographic memory, what I
said originally works for me. And yes it had been implemented, and used
to replace the primary drive recently with out hours/years of preparing
for that. Life is way too short for me to be worried about hiding
something that really really is not likely to be viewed in a way that
will cause me problems, if it were ever to be viewed unknowingly.

Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> It is always something and your situation was one of many
>> possible problems that can crop up.
>> The last time I had a successful full recovery from a backup
>> was when the back up and restore began at the c:/ prompt. That
>> was way before Win 95. I wonder how many 3.5" floppies it
>> would take to back up 150 Gig? LOL
>>
>
> Probably more disks than AOL mailed out!

Naaah. The 3.5" floppies held 1.44 MB, so backing up 150 GB that
way would require 150GB / 1.44 MB = approximately 100,000
diskettes.

AOL mailed out way more than that.

> Can you imagine how long it will take?

At a transfer rate of 15KB/sec, about 10 megaseconds. Add a few seconds per diskette for
swapping in and out, and you're in the neighborhood of four months.

>It'll probably be faster just to print out the bit patterns on a
>modern laser printer and scan them in again. *g*

1 character per bit times 150 GB is 1.2 TB to print, which would require about a thousand
reams of paper. You're right, it would be faster -- at 20 pages/min, that would take less than
nine days to print -- but I think I'd rather store the diskettes.

<g>

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in news:XrGdnbFb-
[email protected]:

> On 5/30/2014 10:32 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
>> Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>>> news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is always something and your situation was one of many
>>>> possible problems that can crop up.
>>>> The last time I had a successful full recovery from a backup
>>>> was when the back up and restore began at the c:/ prompt. That
>>>> was way before Win 95. I wonder how many 3.5" floppies it
>>>> would take to back up 150 Gig? LOL
>>>>
>>>
>>> Probably more disks than AOL mailed out!
>>
>> Naaah. The 3.5" floppies held 1.44 MB, so backing up 150 GB that
>> way would require 150GB / 1.44 MB = approximately 100,000
>> diskettes.
>>
>> AOL mailed out way more than that.
>>
>>> Can you imagine how long it will take?
>>
>> At a transfer rate of 15KB/sec, about 10 megaseconds. Add a few seconds per diskette
for
>> swapping in and out, and you're in the neighborhood of four months.
>>
>>> It'll probably be faster just to print out the bit patterns on a
>>> modern laser printer and scan them in again. *g*
>>
>> 1 character per bit times 150 GB is 1.2 TB to print, which would require about a thousand
>> reams of paper. You're right, it would be faster -- at 20 pages/min, that would take less
than
>> nine days to print -- but I think I'd rather store the diskettes.
>>
>> <g>
>>
> Now just think about keeping all of those diskettes in order, and yes
> you would have them numbered. But who has not ever misfiled something,
> and have 100,000 similar looking disks to look through? LOL
>
Better that, than a quarter-million sheets of paper... LOL

On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>
>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>
>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>> restore that part.
>>>
>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>
>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
>> data up on the cloud.
>>
>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>
>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>
>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
> your data - - - - -
>

Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
any time with any one anywhere.

Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.

But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
your data in house.

On 5/30/2014 10:32 AM, Doug Miller wrote:
> Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>>
>>> It is always something and your situation was one of many
>>> possible problems that can crop up.
>>> The last time I had a successful full recovery from a backup
>>> was when the back up and restore began at the c:/ prompt. That
>>> was way before Win 95. I wonder how many 3.5" floppies it
>>> would take to back up 150 Gig? LOL
>>>
>>
>> Probably more disks than AOL mailed out!
>
> Naaah. The 3.5" floppies held 1.44 MB, so backing up 150 GB that
> way would require 150GB / 1.44 MB = approximately 100,000
> diskettes.
>
> AOL mailed out way more than that.
>
>> Can you imagine how long it will take?
>
> At a transfer rate of 15KB/sec, about 10 megaseconds. Add a few seconds per diskette for
> swapping in and out, and you're in the neighborhood of four months.
>
>> It'll probably be faster just to print out the bit patterns on a
>> modern laser printer and scan them in again. *g*
>
> 1 character per bit times 150 GB is 1.2 TB to print, which would require about a thousand
> reams of paper. You're right, it would be faster -- at 20 pages/min, that would take less than
> nine days to print -- but I think I'd rather store the diskettes.
>
> <g>
>
Now just think about keeping all of those diskettes in order, and yes
you would have them numbered. But who has not ever misfiled something,
and have 100,000 similar looking disks to look through? LOL

On 5/28/2014 10:32 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>>>> when needed is foolish.
>>>
>>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>>> something like a server's active directory.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Finally got my computer restored.
>>
>> Two things were problematic.
>>
>> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
>> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>>
>> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>>
>> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
> still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.

Not in my case.
I had certain things that would have cost me to re-license, also some
complex items that had inter dependencies and would not register
correctly. I did not have the exports of those items needed to rebuild
them.The export would provide the way to get back even with different
keys ... But without the logical export I had would have to use the
original keys, which would not match the current install.

I had done a fresh install, and was striking out trying to get some
things working. Just too many gotchas.

Being un-employed I can't afford to buy the software that I already paid
once for. Some companies allow you to continue to download older
software, but some don't, requiring you to purchase the latest
version... so I was screwed. I could not find all the original downloads
and installers. I thought I kept them, but was not able to find them
all, could be I didn't recognize the name of the installer package.

I was able to move to my wife's laptop for a while, basic stuff mail, MS
office, but I didn't even try to get my cygwin (ksh,bash) shells/X stuff
running, knowing I didn't want to modify everything twice.

You don't realize how much customization and unlocking of things I have
done too. That takes quite some time to do. This is all manual. I
could not remember all of those. I rebuilt my xp system over and over
from scratch... I had the safety of a ghost system to get me out of
trouble. And I could rip through a fresh install and customize most of
it within a few hours. With W7 it's a little different. Some things are
hidden in less obvious places. And it takes quite a bit to unlock them.
In the few days on my wife's W7 I still hadn't been in a comfortable
mode. I probably should build a registry file to modify many of the
individual registry changes.. I did that for some of the xp stuff. But
have not for the WIN7 system.

I disable tons of MS stuff, services and stuff that are not necessary.
Its a pain to go through this just to get a fresh install. I don't need
it. I operate very efficiently most of the time. Do you realize how many
services are running that you don't need or use?

I have some free software too that I use. For 2 of them the new versions
don't do the same thing as the old versions. For some reason some of the
features were removed. I kept trying to figure out how to get back to a
feature in one of the programs. Never found a way to turn it on.. well
in the old, it's just there, no way to turn it on/off. The new
version... it's not there. I use these features.

I am installing new drivers for this laptop, as some are now out of date
with the new hardware.

No this was a win win restoring. First I am back to a very comfortable
env. 2nd, I won't be worried about something that's not working later.
3rd, I have my dbs up and running, so I didn't lose my data, and now
that the town wants to audit me for vb that's welcome.

And I now know how to get it back for next time.
Now if I want to start from scratch, no problem, I have a way to get back.

--
Jeff

On Fri, 23 May 2014 22:07:45 -0400, [email protected] wrote:

>On Fri, 23 May 2014 21:41:26 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
>>> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than
>>> keeping your data in house.
>>
>>One word - Target...
>Yup - the cloud makes ANYONE a target.
>
>Make 2 encrypted copies on external hard drives. Keep one at home and
>one at work, in your car, or in a bank safety deposit box.

The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
when needed is foolish.

On 5/23/2014 9:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 8:59 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>>>> restore that part.
>>>>>
>>>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the
>>>>> new
>>>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer
>>>>> and
>>>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try
>>>>> restoring
>>>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back
>>>> that
>>>> data up on the cloud.
>>>>
>>>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>>>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>>>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>>>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>>>
>>>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>>>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only
>>>> the
>>>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>>>
>>>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>>>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>>>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
>>> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
>>> your data - - - - -
>>>
>>
>> Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
>> any time with any one anywhere.
>>
>> Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.
>>
>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
>> of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
>> your data in house.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Yea like Clare says.
>
> I don't trust anyone. I know what these clowns do... I'm in the business.
> They talk the security game, but so many times they have holes that a
> big oil tanker could come through.
>
> The business usually has security in mind, but it's the people below
> that create bypasses because they don't like jumping through hoops every
> time.
>
> I could explain one of the biggest ways I have seen, but I don't wish to
> describe it here. It's a back door that I often see someone put in so
> they don't have to go through a process.. But it creates a huge hole..
>
> Trust.. Trust no one with your data.
>
> I keep a thumb drive in the safe deposit box.. but even that is
> outdated. I also keep an external in the safe deposit box.. And that IS
> always way out of date.
>
> The most important backup is one that is accessible. So I keep one at
> home..
>


Understood, but I am not even a blip on the target. I played paranoid
for many years and wasted more time than the data was worth.

On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2014 22:22:23 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/23/2014 8:59 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>>>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>>>>> restore that part.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>>>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try
>>>>>> restoring
>>>>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>>>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
>>>>> data up on the cloud.
>>>>>
>>>>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>>>>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>>>>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>>>>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>>>>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
>>>>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>>>>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>>>>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
>>>> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
>>>> your data - - - - -
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
>>> any time with any one anywhere.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.
>>>
>>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
>>> of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
>>> your data in house.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yea like Clare says.
>>
>> I don't trust anyone. I know what these clowns do... I'm in the business.
>> They talk the security game, but so many times they have holes that a
>> big oil tanker could come through.
>>
>> The business usually has security in mind, but it's the people below
>> that create bypasses because they don't like jumping through hoops every
>> time.
>>
>> I could explain one of the biggest ways I have seen, but I don't wish to
>> describe it here. It's a back door that I often see someone put in so
>> they don't have to go through a process.. But it creates a huge hole..
>>
>> Trust.. Trust no one with your data.
>>
>> I keep a thumb drive in the safe deposit box.. but even that is
>> outdated. I also keep an external in the safe deposit box.. And that IS
>> always way out of date.
>>
>> The most important backup is one that is accessible. So I keep one at
>> home..
> It will be 26 years in August that I've been heavily involved in the
> computer business and I've learned there is no such thing as "computer
> security". The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
> ANYTHING else. The only secure data backup is one you have FULL
> control over, and then it is only as secure as you make it.
> There is also no such thing as a bulletproof backup. Test any backup
> before you trust it. Then find another method of backing up and prove
> it works too. When you have 2 you can trust - use them both. at least
> one copy of your data with each method.
>


Did any one mention bullet proof. I have already mentioned to hell with
trying to keep a copy of the OS, as it becomes more corrupt with each
day of use. I really do not want a copy of that.

And, My data is located in two different places, some in 3, on site and
off site. I can live with that.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 21:41:26 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Leon wrote:
>
>>
>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
>> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than
>> keeping your data in house.
>
>One word - Target...
Yup - the cloud makes ANYONE a target.

Make 2 encrypted copies on external hard drives. Keep one at home and
one at work, in your car, or in a bank safety deposit box.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 22:22:23 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 5/23/2014 8:59 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>>>> restore that part.
>>>>>
>>>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>>>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer
>>>>> and
>>>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try
>>>>> restoring
>>>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>>>
>>>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
>>>> data up on the cloud.
>>>>
>>>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>>>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>>>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>>>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>>>
>>>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>>>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
>>>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>>>
>>>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>>>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>>>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
>>> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
>>> your data - - - - -
>>>
>>
>> Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
>> any time with any one anywhere.
>>
>> Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.
>>
>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
>> of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
>> your data in house.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Yea like Clare says.
>
>I don't trust anyone. I know what these clowns do... I'm in the business.
>They talk the security game, but so many times they have holes that a
>big oil tanker could come through.
>
>The business usually has security in mind, but it's the people below
>that create bypasses because they don't like jumping through hoops every
>time.
>
>I could explain one of the biggest ways I have seen, but I don't wish to
>describe it here. It's a back door that I often see someone put in so
>they don't have to go through a process.. But it creates a huge hole..
>
>Trust.. Trust no one with your data.
>
>I keep a thumb drive in the safe deposit box.. but even that is
>outdated. I also keep an external in the safe deposit box.. And that IS
>always way out of date.
>
>The most important backup is one that is accessible. So I keep one at
>home..
It will be 26 years in August that I've been heavily involved in the
computer business and I've learned there is no such thing as "computer
security". The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
ANYTHING else. The only secure data backup is one you have FULL
control over, and then it is only as secure as you make it.
There is also no such thing as a bulletproof backup. Test any backup
before you trust it. Then find another method of backing up and prove
it works too. When you have 2 you can trust - use them both. at least
one copy of your data with each method.

On 5/29/2014 6:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2014 21:32:38 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2014 11:41 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>>>>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>>>>> when needed is foolish.
>>>>
>>>> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
>>>> something like a server's active directory.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Finally got my computer restored.
>>>
>>> Two things were problematic.
>>>
>>> First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
>>> though all partitions GPT were removed.
>>>
>>> And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.
>>>
>>> Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Assuming you are back up and running 5 days after the original post, I
>> still believe a clean reinstall is faster and less problematic.
>
> It's taken me five days (or more) to do a clean install, by the time I
> got everything working and tested, but it's never taken me more than a
> couple of hours to do a restore from a backup. That would piss me
> off, no end.
>

I guess it is a matter of whether you are prepared to do a clean
reinstall or not.

I have obliviously thought this out. I was never ever confident that I
could restore anything/the OS and data after a back up. There was
always something that might come up. Like the need for a totally new
computer. I just did not want to put the time in it any more.

So I keep a copy of all of my program install files and data on a
separate HD and all of that gets backed up to iDrive, I used to use
Carbonite.

I did do a complete clean reinstall back in Feb~March, a new SSD Primary
drive, and it took me 2 days to get back to where I wanted to be and
working at my leisure.

AND I had a relatively clean set up again.

What would piss me off to no end is to reinstall an image and it not
work for what ever of a hundred reasons, and still might have the
problem that caused the need to do this in the first place.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 10:07:57 -0400, "G. Ross" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>woodchucker wrote:
>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>
>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>
>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>> restore that part.
>>
>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>
>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>
>>
>What kind of backup do you have? I have put a new disk in a external
>housing connected to a usb port and restored a complete disk to it
>using an Acronis backup which was on another external disk. In other
>words would clone a new disk from the backup files. This was a few
>years back and I no longer use Acronis because of other issues.
They've thrown a new curve into the game now on new computers - EFI
(not electronic fuel injection - extensible firmware Interface) which
is part and parcel of the Globaly Unit IDentifier (GUID) standard and
GPT (GUID Partition Table) spec that allows you to excede 2tb per
partition.

I've found I can clone a complete drive with certain software (run
from bootable CD or stick) but I have not been able to image
partitions and restore them with any of 5 or 6 products I have tried.
Will try to image the complete drive and see what happens.

The EFI and system (c:) partitions alone just will NOT restore.

Leon wrote:

>
> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than
> keeping your data in house.

One word - Target...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Leon wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Leon wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping
>>> copies of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan
>>> than keeping your data in house.
>>
>> One word - Target...
>
>
> Actually if you are connected to the internet you are a target. And
> that goes up significantly if you use Windows.

Yup

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On 5/24/14 6:35 AM, Swingman wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
>> ANYTHING else.
>
> Don't believe that for a millisecond, like the key to your front door,
> security is relative. Nothing is, or ever has been, absolutely secure.
> There is no such thing security, connected or not.
>
> There is indeed an ability to do an "air-gap hack", readily available
> and in use:
>
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/79141/the-nsa-can-t-hack-you-if-you-don-t-have-internet-this-has-now-been-debunked
>
>
> NSA's ANT division is capable of, and has implanted surveillance
> hardware and software in almost every piece of computer hardware, from
> USB plugs, to hard drives, to serial ports, plugs, mice, keyboards, etc,
> that will provide air-gap bridging from a totally unconnected computer.

Yup, The Chinese USB cables with the hacking hardware embedded in the
cable plug header comes to mind.

-Bruce

>
> DAGS "COTTONMOUTH-I" for starters:
>
> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/03/cottonmouth-i_n.html
>
>


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---

Leon wrote:

>
> I was waiting for some one to mention that. I keep all the data in my
> head encrypted. I store the password on my computer. ;~)

Me too. Totally encrypted. Who in the hell could ever hope to understand
this thinking inside my head?

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
> when needed is foolish.

I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
something like a server's active directory.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing, add a zero and remove the last word.

woodchucker wrote:
> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>
> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
> won't restore. NICE!!!
>
> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
> restore that part.
>
> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>
> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
> Monday or Tuesday.
>
>
What kind of backup do you have? I have put a new disk in a external
housing connected to a usb port and restored a complete disk to it
using an Acronis backup which was on another external disk. In other
words would clone a new disk from the backup files. This was a few
years back and I no longer use Acronis because of other issues.

--
 GW Ross 

 We are not a clone. 

On Fri, 23 May 2014 21:45:37 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>RE: Subject
>
>Not to swift when it comes to puters, but have found the
>following works for me.
>
>Most of the programs I use provide a way to get to DOS.
>
>Once in DOS, the following command line works for me:
>
>dos "xcopy d:\checks\*.* F:\checks /s /v /m" end 1
>
>where CHECKS is a directory and F: is front of puter plug in thumb
>drive.
>
>SFWIW, "F" is a backup of a backup.
>
>Simple, but it works for me and is current.
>
>Lew
>
And xxcopy works even better - and is also free.

On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>
> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
> won't restore. NICE!!!
>
> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
> restore that part.
>
> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>
> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
> Monday or Tuesday.
>
>

FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
data up on the cloud.

I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.

Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.

If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

>On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>
>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>
>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>> restore that part.
>>
>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in the new
>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer and
>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try restoring
>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>
>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>
>>
>
>FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I back that
>data up on the cloud.
>
>I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping back
>and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend the day
>and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>
>Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing only the
>data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>
>If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
your data - - - - -

On 5/28/2014 12:04 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> The thing people forget about *any* backup scheme is that it has to be
>> tested periodically. Just assuming that you can actually do a restore
>> when needed is foolish.
>
> I have doubts about the cloud company's proprietary software restoring
> something like a server's active directory.
>
>

Finally got my computer restored.

Two things were problematic.

First MS install failed to install UEFI on the first install. Even
though all partitions GPT were removed.

And I hit a bug, that I got a new file and it solved my problem.

Now fully restored from my backup... Cool.



--
Jeff

On 5/23/2014 11:54 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 22:22:23 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/23/2014 8:59 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 5/23/2014 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 23 May 2014 11:25:26 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/23/2014 8:32 AM, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>>>> So I can't easily restore my computer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MS in it's infinite wisdom reads that the firmware is different and
>>>>>>> won't restore. NICE!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So back to building from scratch. I can get the files back, it will
>>>>>>> restore that part.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The disk from the old computer is gone, it would not read it in
>>>>>>> the new
>>>>>>> computer. What I might do is stick the new disk in the old computer
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> see if using a monitor I can get it booted. If so, I might try
>>>>>>> restoring
>>>>>>> to that computer and move it back to the new computer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All this will have to wait until I get back from my sons graduation
>>>>>>> Monday or Tuesday.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW I save and back up data only and on a different drive. I
>>>>>> back that
>>>>>> data up on the cloud.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used to subscribe to the notion of having an image but stepping
>>>>>> back
>>>>>> and looking at that I finally decided that I would rather spend
>>>>>> the day
>>>>>> and a half reinstalling the software on a clean disk, minus all the
>>>>>> broken links, lost temp files, corrupt what ever, and so on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Keeping your data on a separate disk relieves you from having to pick
>>>>>> and choose what to back up, no program files mixed in. Backing
>>>>>> only the
>>>>>> data disk up to the cloud cuts down on what gets backed up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you keep a copy of all your program install software on your data
>>>>>> disk also you can quickly reinstall the programs on the new/newly
>>>>>> cleaned primary drive that the OS resides on.
>>>>> And any Tom Dick or Harry can hack into the cloud and there goes
>>>>> your data - - - - -
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well It is encrypted and password protected and anything can happen at
>>>> any time with any one anywhere.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps the best bet is to have 4 or 5 copies at different locations.
>>>>
>>>> But for my money and security a site that specializes in keeping copies
>>>> of your data is probably much more of a good back up plan than keeping
>>>> your data in house.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yea like Clare says.
>>>
>>> I don't trust anyone. I know what these clowns do... I'm in the
>>> business.
>>> They talk the security game, but so many times they have holes that a
>>> big oil tanker could come through.
>>>
>>> The business usually has security in mind, but it's the people below
>>> that create bypasses because they don't like jumping through hoops every
>>> time.
>>>
>>> I could explain one of the biggest ways I have seen, but I don't wish to
>>> describe it here. It's a back door that I often see someone put in so
>>> they don't have to go through a process.. But it creates a huge hole..
>>>
>>> Trust.. Trust no one with your data.
>>>
>>> I keep a thumb drive in the safe deposit box.. but even that is
>>> outdated. I also keep an external in the safe deposit box.. And that IS
>>> always way out of date.
>>>
>>> The most important backup is one that is accessible. So I keep one at
>>> home..
>> It will be 26 years in August that I've been heavily involved in the
>> computer business and I've learned there is no such thing as "computer
>> security". The only secure computer is one that is not connected to
>> ANYTHING else. The only secure data backup is one you have FULL
>> control over, and then it is only as secure as you make it.
>> There is also no such thing as a bulletproof backup. Test any backup
>> before you trust it. Then find another method of backing up and prove
>> it works too. When you have 2 you can trust - use them both. at least
>> one copy of your data with each method.
>>
>
>
> Did any one mention bullet proof. I have already mentioned to hell with
> trying to keep a copy of the OS, as it becomes more corrupt with each
> day of use. I really do not want a copy of that.
>
> And, My data is located in two different places, some in 3, on site and
> off site. I can live with that.

BTW, I do not do MS updates for the very reason. While I was on XP, my
internet stopped working after an MS update. Could not get it working
doing normal troubleshooting.

I had to do a GHOST restore.

Stopped all updates for a while.

This was the second time that something really went bad from an MS
update. The first was even worse, but I can't remember what it was.

Now, I pick and chose what I need. BUT they are off.

Half the stuff MS pushes as critical are not.
It's a matter of knowing what is and what is not. Not all security flaws
are critical, if you don't use the components.
For me I don't use IE or Outlook.

Every onces in a while I go through read the list, figure out what I
need and don't and install the individual updates.

And yes your computer gets slower and slower with automatic updates. Not
so much picking and chosing... A little, but much less noticeable.


--
Jeff