Rollback RX

If not sure if this falls under the category of virtualization, but since Rollback RX is offered at Bits du Jour today I thought it warranted a thread. What are your opinions of it, say as opposed to other apps such as Shadow Defender or Returnil? I understand that those two are not rollback, but do you trust them more than Rollback RX?

Also, if I am correct, Comodo Time Machine and Rollback RX are virtually the same application, right? CTM uses the Rollback engine. The only differences I can see are the gui and the fact that Rollback RX offers snapshot encryption.

 

I'm sure you will get diverse opinions on this, but having tried both a virtualization program (Shadow Defender) and an instant restore program (Rollback Rx), I much prefer the latter, because with the former I had to remember to 'commit' whatever I wanted saved after a reboot (or it was lost)! That turned out to be problematic for me. For my way of computing, Rollback Rx works seemlessly. With RB, i can revert to a prior RB snapshot at any time and (if necessary) recover any current/new files to that prior snapshot.

Afaik Nate, that is not correct. Rollback Rx and Eaz-Fix are sister products from the same developer, but not CTM. Of course, RB and EF are not free (whereas CTM is free), but as they are much more mature than CTM, RB and EF have already gone through their 'growing pains'.

 

Thank you for that. One thing that I am unaware of, is it possible to revert and (after that) go back forward. I'm not sure why I'd need to, because snapshots can be mounted (great feature), but I was just wondering.

Also, with Rollback RX, the snapshots can be encrypted. So, won't that prevent infected of various advanced trojans?

 

Yes, that is easily done (reminds me of the movie 'Back To The Future').

RB doesn't filter any programs/files on its own (ie., it doesn't interfere with program installation or execution), so you are still vulnerable ...but you can always revert to a prior (clean) RB snapshot...

....and my last line of defense (ie., system recovery) is the always reliable Drive Snapshot.

 

They do have common code origins, but CTM has diverged from Rollback Rx/EAZ-Fix.

As an approach, not my style, but of the 3, I'd definitely opt for one of the latter two despite free vs. paid. Seems to be lots of pain potentially incurred using CTM, presumably due to the feature set extensions.

Search the forums and you should get a good sense of the various pro and con positions.

Blue

 

Nate, since you are considering Rollback Rx (btw, that BdJ deal is incredible), you should know the facts concerning two objections that some people have with these instant restore programs:

1. You should not defrag your disk in an RB (and the like) environment, because RB sees 'file movements' as major data changes and therefore the size of the successive snapshot will be quite large! The fact of the matter is that disk defragging serves no purpose when you are operating in an RB environment! RB provides its own snapshot defragger, which does the job perfectly.

2. You have to understand how to use disk imaging with an RB installation. In order to completely capture an RB environment with all of its snapshots you must boot into another OS (eg., Bart/WinPE) and run an 'all-sectors' backup (maintenance mode if you use DS) of your C-drive/partition from that other OS. If you do the more typical disk image backup from within Windows (with RB installed), you will just capture your current snapshot/state (all of your older RB snapshots will be gone) and you will have to reinstall RB upon recovering that image!

Hth,
Aaron

 

Thank you very much Aaron Here. It seems like, based on what you say, that Rollback RX might not be for me. I would create very few snapshot because I change my disk images frequently and after little change. The ability to use Drive Snapshot within Windows is very important because of that. I was able to create .reg and .bat entries that allow me to create disk image via the drive context menu, which is very cool and easy. I don't want anything to hinder that. It seems like I have a very good tag-team of Sandboxie, Shadow Defender, and Drive Snapshot anyway.

I think I'll pass.

 

Nate, that's ok - I just thought you should be aware of the potential issues if you were to go with RB.

As you indicated, you already have a 'solid' approach - although it seems to me that using SandboxIE and SD concurrently is kind of redundant - or is that not true?

Aaron

 

Well I just consider it another essential layer. Here's why I'll keep Sandboxie.

• There has been some debate whether or not SD protects against the TDL/TDSS trojan. Sandboxie does.
  
• Shadow Defender might not be in development anymore, no one knows. Sandboxie is. (Thank you Tzuk.)
  
• I set global read/write permission through Shadow Defender for my entire Opera profile directory. I have have read/write permissions given to Sandboxie. But with the latter I can restrict what exe has the ability to read/write in those directories. Shadow, or any virtualization application for that matter, can not do that. So I have to ask myself what are the chances of something being written it that directory that is outside of anything I have sandboxed, because if those were to run I'd be protected. The chances are slim at best.

 

Sorry to intrude your topic,

When rollback rx is installed can you secure delete a file using a 3 times wipe i use r-wipe and clean and i always 3 times wipe the trash bin..

I havent got rollback installed or ever used just wondered thats all.. i was thinking of trialing it

 

That is a very good question, and one I admit I haven't given much thought to. But I would assume logically speaking you would not be able to securely erase a file if it is under the protection of an sort of virtualization application, since their function is to prevent changes to the system. The file would reappear as soon as your system is reverted. Well, let me rephrase that. You can do it but you will not have the desired effect.

 

i see what you mean.. Might give rollback rx a spin i like the idea of it, i have got first-defence isr original one but it takes up to much space... haven`t used it in about 1 year now

 

For what it's worth, I like the program very much. It's just that rollback apps don't really fit in to my current set-in-stone application configuration.

You might want to try contacting Rollback RX and see if you can still take advantage of the bits du jour deal. I know that it was extended previously.

 

Thanks for the tip... just installing it now seems pretty good actually alot different from what i thought it was going to be like,

Will keep you posted so far so good

 

The file deletion would occur in your current RB snapshot just as it would if you were not using RB. But the file will be preserved in any prior snapshot where it had existed. If deleting a file in your current snapshot were to wipe it from all snapshots, that would invalidate the entire purpose of RB.

 

Coming to this thread rather late but I thought I would mention that there is a companion program to RollBack Rx that will allow you to make images of the drive that includes Rollback (I am not sure if it will include all snapshots or just the current one). The version of Rx I am using has this feature as part of the program, the version after the one have had the feature split off into a 2nd program,,,,,,,, and while I have done many reversions I have never had to do a full restore from an image,,,,,,Rx is just that good.

 

Tell me about it...
CTM has led many users to Format their PCs.
Free is nice, but Dangerous is Not nice at all.

Comodo should Not release products as early as that....

 

Unfortunately, the 'companion imaging program' to which you are referring (using) provides no benefit whatsoever over DS and other disk-imaging programs insofar as fully capturing a Rollback environment (that may be why it was eventually unbundled from RB/EF).

If one expects to recover Rollback and all of its snapshots when performing a disk-image restore, the backup must be performed as described in item #2 of post #6 above!

 

Understood, but at least with this app you do not have issues with the MBR as you would if you just did a regular backup with a program unrelated to Rx. BTW (as I have written here before) I back up with the Rx imaging program 1X weekly and monthly, when I uninstal Rx to do my regular maintenance, I image using Paragon. I am not especially concerned with getting all the snaps in an image. What I am concerned with is recovering my drive,

 

Hey BG, since you said in your prior post:

I can't help but wonder how you can be so sure you wouldn't have MBR issues if you had to restore an image which was created from within Windows (with RB installed)?

Aaron

 

I used to do it with the Drive Image that came with Eaz-Fix with no problems. Upon restore, it has an option to repair MBR that you can select. Half the time I didn't even select that option and didn't have any problems with a restore.

 

I base this on what the publishers of RollBack say. Of course this is no guarantee but they indicate it is only the companion imaging program that understands Rx. Others will have to have the MBR repaired before the PC will function correctly.

I must say that according to the publishers no other imaging program will do a proper job of it if the image is made while Rx is installed but many Wilders posters indicate that if you do a full sector by sector image you can restore the drive fully intact, snapshots and all. This is something I have not done either but I have no doubt that what they say is correct. Too many different individuals have said they have done this for it to be false (I think).

 

As Aaron Here indicated above Rollback Rx and Eaz-Fix are sister products from the same developer, this is probably why you did not have any problems with the MBR. The programs are designed to attend to this issue.

 

Uh yea, it wasn't my intention to dispute that and since it had already been mentioned, I didn't see the point in it. I was merely stating that one doesn't have problems with the MBR after restoring an image which has been made from inside Windows.

 

Sorry if you thought I was disputing something you may have posted,,,,that was not my intent, I was just clarifying that there is no problem if the program is designed to work with a Rx type program.