Find the answer to your Linux question:
Results 1 to 2 of 2
Anyone who has tried this yet ? Seems you regular HD has more space on it then they say it does. As reported by Slashdot. Links: Slashdot The Inquirer By ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Linux Enthusiast Opnosforatou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vleuten, The Netherlands
    Posts
    552

    Unused space on hard drives recovered?


    Anyone who has tried this yet ?

    Seems you regular HD has more space on it then they say it does.
    As reported by Slashdot.

    Links:

    Slashdot
    The Inquirer


    By INQUIRER staff: Tuesday 09 March 2004, 14:33
    READER WILEY SILER has sent us a method which he said was discovered by Scott Komblue and documented by himself which they claim can recover unused areas of the hard drive in the form of hidden partitions.

    We haven't tried this here at the INQUIRER, and would caution readers that messing with your hard drive is done at your own peril and very likely breaches your warranty. Here is what Wiley and Scott did.

    * UPDATE Does this work? We're not going to try it on our own machine thank you very much. Instead, we're waiting for a call from a hard drive company so we can get its take on these claims.

    ** UPDATE II A representative for large hard drive distributor Bell Micro said: "This is NOT undocumented and we have done this in the past to load an image of the original installation of the software. When the client corrupted the o/s we had a boot floppy thatopened the unseen partition and copied it to the active or seen partition. It is a not a new feature or discovery. We use it ourselves without any qualms".

    *** UPDATE III See the letters column today
    Check Inquirer link for full article.


    [Update 1]

    It seems that it is too good to be true. Here is a reaction from a reader:

    Hi Mike,

    About the "recover unused space on your drive" article:

    Working for a data-recovery company I know a thing or two about harddisks....

    One is that if the vendors would be able to double the capacity for just about nothing, they would.

    All this probably does is to create an invailid partition table which ends up having:

    |...new partition.............................
    |old partition.................................|

    overlapping partitions. So writing either partition will corrupt the other. It probably so happens that whatever situation people tried it, it just so happened that the (quick) format of the "new" partition didn't corrupt the other partition to make it unbootable.

    And the 200G -> 510Gb "upgrade" probably has ended up with three overlapping partitions....

    Roger
    Source: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14608

    Anyone here have some ideas on this ????
    ---[ MS09-99896 - Vulnerability in All MS Windows OS ; Using Windows Could Allow Remote Code Execution. ]---
    Hardware: Asus P4P800, 1GB, P4-3Ghz, Asus V9950, Maxtor ATA HD\'s, 3Com GBit lan, Audigy ZS Plat.

  2. #2
    Linux Engineer kriss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,113
    I read an article about it, explaining why it wasn't wise to do so, but it is in Norwegian, so I doubt any of you would have intrest in reading it. Anyways, it was basicly explaining that while a 80 gig harddisk might be identical to a 120 gig harddisk, it only met the quality requirements to 80 gig, and not 120. So I guess its not so smart to tamper with it.

    But if you do, tell us how it went

    Kriss

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •