Rollback Home Free Help

There may be a START entry for the SysTray item (UI to SETTINGs, SNAPSHOT/ROLLBACK functions, etc.) but Rollback is fully active all the time... no way to turn it off other than unINSTALL.

 

Ok, I thought disabling the startup entry will make it manual.

If such programs can have issues with windows updates, why dont other software vendors mention this?

I have tried previously Comodo Time Machine & Sys Restore. Though no prob happen with windows updates but they dont mention some windows updates could create issues with their software.

 

Yesnoo, CTM has never operated successfully in the environment where Windows updates may have messed it up. The mess-ups all started when Windows released the Update #1 for Windows 8.1 (which, if CTM was functional at that level, would have blown up also) and has been happening randomly with updates since. System Restore, being a MicroSloth product, was never affected by updates... but also never saved all your important personal program data.

Horizon Data Sys (Rollback RX) does have some mention of the problem (not in the application's decription and function description) and has that link to let you know when updates are safe to install... but they would like to blame the problem on Windows Updates rather than the design of Rollback. I don't think you can hold Windows Updates responsible for a problem that only Rollback RX sees in its operations. The two, Windows OS and Rollback, are not very synergistic at this junction, but it's probably wrong to assume Windows is in error and ask them to fix it

 

Sys Restore I mentioned is this http://www.sysnew.com/sysrestore/

You have mentioned that the mess started with update 1 for Windows 8.1, does this mean Win 7 64 windows updates has no probs with Rollback?

 

Sorry 'bout that. I've never used the above...

I cannot answer that question... it's best asked on the HDS Rollback RX forum.

 

Hello Kurtis..
I sent you an PM on friday,and you replied and asked which version of RX I got.. and then nothing??
You don't want testers anymore ??

 

I suspect that he was off duty for the weekend....

 

Our programs do set it to manual, and I mean we do that for a reason. It's so that Windows doesn't automatically install a compromising update. That said, you're right some people do this, and while we don't recommend people change these settings. Sometimes it's inevitable that people will, and we'll try to do the best we can to help that customer, but really I mean that's a conscious decision they make to change the settings, and it's not always safe. It's not like we can hover over every customer and be like. "Wouldn't do that"

 

Kurtis from Horizon Data Sys.

Froggie is right, if you decide to use RollBack Rx and get Version 10.3, it will automatically change your settings so that Windows doesn't automatically install updates. Use this time to do some research, understandably it's not as easy as just having those updates install, but it affords you that window (pardon the pun) to see if that update will harm RollBack Rx. It's a great program (biases aside) but there is an opportunity for the user to install an update that shouldn't be installed, utilize the opportunity. Heck, even email us or file a Support Ticket asking us. Froggie is right, that FORUM is a great resource too.

We don't know what the hell Microsoft will do, but we can at least take the time to find out together

 

Yes I was. I'm only on Wilders when I'm paid to be jk

My weekend was wet, it consisted of GTA V (my current obsession), helping a family member move, and spending valuable time with the girlfriend.

...now we're back to it haha.

On a serious note, I did see the PM. Still arranging things on our end!

 

Our product exists outside of Windows infrastructure, and sadly, if Windows were to ever change that infrastructure, it COULD cause major ramifications for our software.

Most users have a work around for this, Large companies use SCCM, some users will test it out in a VM. There's many different ways to know. Some even wait for us to test it. Myself (and we are explaining this in a future Knowledgebase article) I have two separate hard drives, one for my OS, and other for my data. If the OS one fails, RollBack may not work, but at least data is intact.

With our latest release, we changed the settings of Windows so that it wouldn't automatically install updates. It'll wait for the user to install. So this way, you have that window to look into whether or not this is an update you should install.

 

Some points and questions:

Does RBRX 10.3 and up use any form of on the fly disk encryption? I'm too lazy to set up a system right now and check for myself.

And would there be a way to have RBRX detect that a disk was modified outside of RBRX? Such as using a linux boot disk to do some disk editing or adding/deleting files. You know things that happen behind RBRX' back. Perhaps a checksum of some areas of the disk would help here?

A time-honored tradition I continue to observe from way back in the Apple II days. Keep your OS/Applications on a small fast disk. And your user data totally separate from all that on another disk. This gives several advantages:

Your personal data is far more important than any program or OS. The OS disk can be repaired or re-built, your personal data and records? Not so easily.

You can build your system just the way you like it, including RBRX. Get it all updated, get all your applications and programs working. Set your settings, and so on and so forth. That's part #1. Image it and set that image aside. Should anything blow up, or RBRX go South, you can restore all this within an hour. A stress-free hour I might add.

Once part #1 done, then you work with all your user data, records, pdf, doc, jpg, mov, txt, mp3, and all that good stuff. Keep them on another disk. Separate. Either internal or external or whatever have you. That's part #2. This disk can essentially be plugged into any other computer. It can be used to transport your data to another computer even. This is your irreplaceable material. This disk is preferably backed up via file-sync and not imaged. You may be working with only a handful of files over a period of time. And no reason to re-backup everything. No reason to re-backup 20GB of photos if all you did these past two months was to add in 8 pictures. Just sync the differences. Manually or automatically. Another advantage is if you need to restore one file, you can do so instantly and not have to restore an entire image.

A convenient offshoot of this is to keep all your working personal data files in a MyDocuments2 folder. This way other non-conforming programs won't piss all over it. Too many programs use MyDocuments as a repository for settings and other little things. Well, with all your personal stuff in your own folders - it should be easy to sync the differences every few weeks with little or no time. And most sync programs allow you to review the differences to be sure you're doing it right!

A few times I had to restore due to hardware issues and failures, and it took all of 45 minutes at that. Barely enough time for Sunday morning tea and crumpets. But best of all I wasn't gyrating around upside down on my head or swimming on the floor under the table.


In recap..

A two-part backup lets you capture your working system once every 6 months. This helps save you time if you need to rebuild. The second part keeps your personal information safe and duplicated. This second part can be done easily and more frequently and quickly. It could even be fun!

Consider.. A failed disk? You're covered, 1-hour and you're back in business. Junior junked your jpegs? A matter of minutes with a restore sync and your on your way.

If you keep your accumulated personal files separate and not RBRX-protected, then RBRX can rollback to an earlier or later time with ease. AND it won't delete photos you may have added in-between those times. AND it won't bring back ones you want to stay deleted!

 

+1

 

I'm not sure how you can possibly tell since the data RBrx manages can only be seen by itself and when it's presented to you, it's CLEAR. I believe what they mean is the data structure is "encrypted" (discombobulated might be a better description ) but I think, unless they made a big change, the data left on the disk during a Redirect on Write is still CLEAR in nature (I'm sure Kurtis may chime in here with a clearer explanation).

The problem here is there's only two things that can see the hidden RBrx structures... it's sub-console (located on the protected volume) and its special Scavenger Tool (which runs from a PE-based recovery media).

Given that... understand that anything that modifies the protected media without using the protected OS itself only sees Rollback's so called BASELINE snapshot, that's the system state at the time of RBrx installation plus a few RBrx application files and a driver or two. That also means only the Master File Table and File Allocation Tables at that point in time can be seen and understood by an external process (WinPE, Linux, etc.). Every change since that installation (if the BASELINE has NOT been updated)... every snapshot of data, every additional file, every document change, every program addition, everything is now hidden to both the protected OS and external processes. If you think about this, since Rollback uses a Redirect on Write method (if something changes, leave the original in place and write the changes elsewhere in my secret file system), all the changes mentioned previously will be written into FREE areas of the file system that only Rollback knows about. That means that all that unallocated file space that external processes see is actually filled with every piece of data added to your system since Rollback was installed... external processes think all that space is empty, but it really isn't.

Now your external process (Linux copying, etc.) start moving all its directed data (Theme files in the case of NCP's original issue) into this FREE space that it sees, and in the process clobbers all the hidden Rollback data that's currently residing there... Kaboom! Once done, Rollback's managed data is gone... and there may be more than just DATA there (I don't know for sure), they may be some RBrx structure info or even parts of its DataBase for managing its hidden data.

That said, even if the LIVE Rollback system could be brought back up at this point (most of the time it's DEAD), all it might be able to do is detect that it's been totally compromised and offer no real solution to recovering that data. The only other process that can "see" Rollback snapshot mgmt data is their Scavenger Process. Same thing applies here... if they can detect that the known special RBrx sub-system has been compromised, there's not much they can do for you. If they find some of the special RBrx structures in place (possible location of a snapshot), the Scavenger will allow you to mount that snap and copy off whatever data you may need. But even in this scenario, when a file is copied from a damaged RBrx system, pieces of it may be located in multiple snapshots (original, mod #1, mod #2, etc.). Even if the recovery is successful, some of the content of that file may have been damaged by the external operation without the control structure knowing... you'll have a file that might be partially correct.

As you can see... since Rollback is primarily designed to completely hide itself from the standard Windows OS, and all Windows programs AND Linux apps that understand FAT32/NTFS are designed to work within the realm of that OS and its file structures... we have a serious potential problem. At this point in its development, even if Rollback (or Scavenger) could detect outside interference, there's absolutely nothing it can do about it... it's too late.

 

When RollBack Rx is installed your drive is automatically encrypted by RollBack Rx.

Any other Disk Encryption software will create major conflicts, so be careful. Read more HERE.

Not advised, it will cause a massive internal error in your snapshot files. This won't end well.

This is my Personal Preference. Everyone has a different approach, and I can't say whether it's good or bad, but the unspoken truth of the separate partitions/hard drives is a good idea. We're internally discussing a Knowledgebase article and/or even a Youtube video explaining all of this. We'll see.

 

I dont have 2 drives but have partitioned my single drive into C & E, C is the system drive & E is My Data.
So does this means if I install Rollback Home & protect only C i.e system drive & any windows updates conflicts with Rollback Home, C drive could be damaged but E drive will be safe & data can be recovered?

Or Partition is just a convenient way to store personal data seperately & may help in some scenario but not in Rollback Home scenario.
And in Rollback Home scenario, seperate drives i.e 2 drives will definitely help to keep the data safe to a large extent or even 100% safe.

 

Probably so, but if the MBR (and partition structure) was destroyed in your scenario you would have to resort to using a partition recovery tool (or restore a backup of your standard Windows MBR).

That would be an even safer solution than relying on a single internal drive, but the very best thing you can do is to create image backups of your system onto an external drive!

pv

 

That's exactly right, because if Windows is compromised, that drive and whatever data is on it could be as well. I have an SSD for my OS and a standard HDD for my data, but you could partition as well and do the same thing.

Having RollBack Rx (Home or Pro) on your OS Drive or Partition is great protection. RollBack RX will cover your C: drive so that data regardless is protected. I use RollBack Rx on my OS drive in case I install a program and it botches things, or if my girlfriend wants to use the computer she has her own separate snapshot.

People can use RollBack Rx and partitions in interesting ways, this is just one example.

 

Well, that won't be so straight-forward in yesnoo's situation if a system crash wipes out the MBR and partition structure!

As a RBrx user I certainly agree that it affords excellent protection (that is unless it crashes!) ...and yesnoo is concerned about a potential RBrx crash...

pv

 

Well we're talking about a compromise of RollBack Rx through a change in the infrastructure through a Windows Update. Which is the primary reason that RollBack Rx would be compromised, and if you do a Windows Update and it alters the partition/drive on which the OS is on, it won't affect the drive containing data. So if on the off-chance RollBack Rx does fail, data on the separate drive is ok. Now if you're talking about radical software that really is in it to annihilate your system, or hardware failiure (or a cataclysmic blend of both) then yes, there is a very small chance that the partition could fail. However, that's why we have imaging software (i.e. Drive Cloner)

If you have two drives, one is for the OS, C: drive, and the other is for data, D: drive, then if C crashes, what do you really lose? I mean, you're not going to lose anything important, because if you're doing it right, your data is on a completely separate drive (either physical or partitioned). I have had issues with my C: drive crashing on my home computer, and it's fine. Like I mentioned above, if you value your data on that other drive, invest in imaging software.

There's a lot of doom and gloom around the internet but honestly, if you have the proper tools and know-how you're fine.

 

Alright. So then any file added to a disk (copied from usb key, or dl, or created by Word) while RBRX is active will be encrypted? Yes? And it will not be part of the baseline? Yes? What would be the method of that encryption? AES-256?

And if that is the situation it would prevent any recovery program from seeing files and their fragments and their headers. Any recovery program would only see the baseline files that were there prior to RBRX install. The newly added material would appear as random data.

KB tutorial article and Youtube video explaining all this would be a boon. It might even help non-RBRX users do things one step better too.

Separate partitions, separate disks, separate something. In fact it might honestly be desirable to have RBRX just doing its sector redirection magic on a drive with continually changing data. Like the OS/Application material.

There is little or no need to have RBRX overseeing a huge mp3/mov/avi/jpg/doc collection. This type of material is largely static compared to OS/Application stuff. This material may move around amongst folders as you organize things over time. Some files may be deleted or added here an there. And that tends to be a sporadic activity.

Most people that lose large media collections lose it because they either format the disk or drop and damage it. Since this is an external drive shuttled between systems or its a raided NAS, RBRX would be no good for it anyways.

 

Kurtis, I've read quite a few complaints where a Windows update resulted in a RBrx system crash and the user wasn't able to start Windows or even get to the RBrx sub-console!

Well you would lose your Windows installation, all of your apps, and your program data!

You really don't need image backup software to protect your data on drives/partitions other than C: -- in those situations I find other backup measures preferable. Image backup (or cloning) is vital to protect what you have on C:

Kurtis, no one disputes that, but the point many here object to is that HDS marketing hype would have people believe that RBrx is all that they do need to protect their system against any disaster!

pv

 

That is correct. Years ago I tried imaging for my mp3/doc/jpeg/avi/mov/pdf stuff, (exe/zip/rar/txt) too. And it became very restricting and beyond tedious when I wanted to recover or repair 2 files on my working disk. Not to mention time consuming.

I just wanted to replace 2 files, a jpg and a doc. I **possibly offensive words removed** during editing and I had to unpack the image to another disk entirely, then grab the 2 replacements then copy them to my system where I could finally work on them. Ughh... That was years ago.

Today I do things differently. My data "collection" is file-synced exclusively using DirSync from Softology, or another one called FreeFileSync. Actually I use them both. Both are very small and simple, non-descript, everyday, file-sync programs - of the kinds of which there are hundreds out there.

This means my entire personal data collection is a simple duplicate file-by-file.

Now when I blow up a file because of bad editing or whatever I simply pull out my backup and manually transfer it back over. It takes seconds. And I can target the damaged file instantly.

If I've been working on a project and bedtime rolls around.. I drop a second copy onto my backup drive. Takes seconds, as opposed to 2 hours or much more to re-image everything. It's stupid to spend time re-imaging a 600GB archived collection for want of changing 5MB of data.

I also tend to semi-automatically conduct my backups. This means I manually start a program to do the task and check for errors at the end. Since it goes so quickly I just might sit there and watch it! This way I know exactly what is being processed and that it is done correctly.

 

I'm sorry, Kurtis, but I have no idea what that means. The BASELINE snapshot sure isn't "encrypted" and other than the special Rollback UNKNOWN file structure ("SECTOR Redirect," ba-bee!) in use to manage the snapshots, I don't think the snapshot CONTENT is "encrypted" either.

Maybe a better explanation of what Rollback ENCRYPTION really is (not how it's done) would help us all better understand it...