The unofficial Shadow Defender Support Thread.

My question is not about SD commit feature. A few days ago i noticed that copying large files (in this case windows ISO) while under shadow mode (not commiting, just copying from one partition to another or to USB drive) gets stuck at 0 bytes/s and eventually explorer freezes. At that moment windows 11 october update was installed, but after applying november update problem still remains. Before october update everything worked normally. Anyone noticed similar issue?

 

Don´t use RAM cache (if you are using it), check that there is enough disk space for the disk cache.

I haven´t experienced problems like this, but I only shadow the system partitions. I don´t shadow the data partitions.

 

I dont use RAM cache and every partition has at least 30 GB of free space, but I do use SD on all partitions, which wasnt problem until recently.

 

I have mentioned a couple of times in the past on this forum about this issue which remains unresolved as the developer 'Tony has become inaccessible recently. What I found on my xp system (the newer operating systems 10/11 are probably not necessarily, per se, the problem, as I see it...??) It does seem that very large numbers of files stick in Shadow Defender's 'throat' when committed together doing a right click 'Commit by Shadow Defender' in Windows Explorer and I have experienced this a number of times and emailed Tony about it with no reply or response. If you break the same files into smaller number commits and send it commits ok just like normal (if I remember correctly). It just doesn't like the one big number of files at once. It may be that we could make some sort of cache adjustment somewhere to accommodate to larger files numbers commit (if that is the problem) being held as one unit but I don't know. I'm open to suggestions from those more knowledgable about file systems etc.

nb I don't use the Shadow Defender ram cache option. (It is not an option in Shadow Defender in my XP system anyway)

I do (by the way) use other operating systems with Shadow Defender but my experiences have been when using XP in the past...although I don't believe that it is an XP problem particularly..

I've mentioned it an the past
Do a forum search using 'large' and 'sdmod' as the person for past conversation about this issue.
A couple of results
here
here

nb post updated and edited by me as I remembered the issue.

 

Does SD work in the latest versions of Windows 10 and Windows 11?

 

Windows 10, sure.

Windows 11, don’t know.

 

@aldist, Yes and Yes.

 

@kosamja, @sdmod,
Fwiw, I have never experienced any such issue and while I'm now using the latest SD version I've been using SD since 2011 on my Win7 desktop and since 2018 on my Win10 laptop (see my sig). I do have some exclusion settings in my Shadow Mode partitions and I always use disk for SD's write cache (as I haven't seen any practical benefit to using RAM cache).

So I just conducted a test using both my Win7 and Win10 systems whereby I copied a 4GB file from a UFD to a folder in my 'shadowed' C-partition. Throughout the file-copy the speed showed no substantial fluctuation from start to finish on both PCs, averaging about 4 MB/s on my Win7 Desktop (HDD) and around 18 MB/s on my Win10 laptop (SSD). Then I copied the 4GB file back to the UFD from the 'shadowed' C-partition (on both PCs), and again there was no substantial speed reduction at any time during the file-copying process.

If/when I decide to install Win11 on my laptop (I'm not in any hurry to do that!) I'll run a similar test.

Happy Holidays...

 

I wonder if you have tried doing a test with right click commit for a large group (number) of files at one time?
Maybe a few hundred single files as a 'commit'.
I don't think that it has to be a particularly large sized group over all.
I'd be interested in the outcome.

 

No, I rarely commit more than 1 file during any shadowed session. Frankly, I can't imagine a situation where you would/should want to commit a large number of files at one time!

Happy New Year

 

Same. I tried the Ram Cache many times before, but like you @pvsurfer, i realized zero benefit from it's usage. Maybe a higher velocity memory setup/rig might would be of some advantage but it's enough on this end to allow SD to 'write to disk' then dispense it on reboot. My selected common preference since i use it on-demand-only anyway. In addition anytime i use 'commit' it's performed as expected with no issues. I also don't save large data or files even when engaged at random.

Happy 2023 To All

 

@EASTER @pvsurfer I also rarely commit large files or large numbers of files in right click 'commit' and we all use different systems and versions of Shadow Defender but I was trying to find out specifically the failure problem that users have with large numbers of files being committed.
I've tried to address this problem in the past and recently but with not a great deal of engagement from members (no criticism intended).
Members usually say 'It doesn't happen to me because...' and just leave it there, so haven't been able to explore the issue to any depth or get a large user consensus 'feel' for what is happening. Tony does not communicate, so no help or clues from there. Is it a Windows thing with it's various iterations, a Shadow Defender thing ditto or a personal configuration (hardware/software or what? I have never used the cache ram option in Shadow Defender because I haven't felt the need for it. Does some other system 'guard' kernel app conflixt and hold the files in a particular context and not allow the 'transaction'? It's not an everyday problem and largely and generally doesn't impact on most users. I can survive personally and Shadow Defender always serves me well but I'm curious.
I hope that everyone has a happy and 'prosperous' new year whatever form that takes and hope that we control the software more than the software controls us.

 

Um, just wondering whether SD is now abandonware?
Two+ years seems like a long time between updates.
Just my $.02

 

Makes sense. You been nothing short of pure amazing @sdmod (Patrick) in sharing your vital insight into the workings as well as issues surrounding each version of Shadow Defender. Thanks a plenty for that consideration.

Frankly on my 8.1 system SD v.578 just simply works and found it unneccesary to update it any further on those Windows Versions. And as you might suspect i have thrown everything including the kitchen sink at it and it holds it's stability and vigor like none other. Maybe Deep Freeze is the closest of anything that competes. But long as ransomwares of all sorts, file infectors of all sorts and anything else crafty in between can't break it, i keep it just as it is. Solid as GRANITE.

 

It's hard to say if Shadow Defender is abandonware, in terms of the developer presence, as 'Tony' (the developer) has been absent for very long time in the past without explanation or apology before, during and on return.
This is not necessarily a criticism of the developer as I am not sure of the circumstances or context which may restrict his ability to communicate.
Originally when Shadow Defender was in the infancy of development 'Tony' had a forum of his own. The forum was used by a few people at that stage and Tony posted there but not much. I was later Global Moderator on his forum but after a long period of absence by Tony and myself not having full administrative power to use forum functions to combat the full on attack from a barrage of shoe adverts spam, followed after my attempt at intervention (banning and deleting etc) the spammers started bombarding the forum with graphic child pornography and threats This meant that I had to be constantly on the go to keep on top of it and delete things. It was a massive daily task. The spammers worked out which times of the day I was sleeping and posted then. Eventually the forum glitched and 'choked' and I did not have the admin rights to fix it myself or the access to Tony to fix it.
Later I ran (with Tony's permission on his return) a forum of my own with direct links to his Shadow Defender pages. Tony told me during that period that he struggled to communicate in English and that a page of English overfaced him. Unfortunately I had (naively) used a free hosting for my forum not understanding that these hostings will often get you engaged and when your membership seem to thrive will pull the plug leaving you with no access to configure your forum to make you pay. I had saved my daily database backups but my options to configure and repair were lost within the context of that particular provider website.
One thing to consider is that Shadow Defender was almost a direct copy particularly GUI graphical user interface etc of an existing software (at the time of Shadow Defender's development) called ShadowUser (Copyright  2004 StorageCraft Technology Corporation™).
Shadowuser was heavily pirated.
During Tony's absence there was another Shadow Defender type software that tried to raise it's head but it seemed very dodgy and was not taken up much (as I understand it) and people were suspicious of it.
Tony mainly communicated with members about bugs etc through email but of recent times that has died too.
I have emailed Tony many times about all sorts of Shadow Defender queries and issues and not received a reply for a long time.
As I understand it, though, the software is still for sale and that sales mechanism still works for purchase.
During the period of development of Shadow Defender we have also seen Windows operating systems change, repeatedly and I'm sure that presents challenges to developers trying to keep up with new developments.
During my relationship with 'Tony' our communication has not been consistent and steady and sometimes I would receive a reply to one bug or suggestion immediately but then at other times completely ignored.
He seemed to be selective in the ones he chose to reply to.
I always thought to myself that it might be down to the vagary of the email system but was never quite sure what was going on.


Patrick (sdmod)

 

Thanks @EASTER
You have always been a loyal Shadow Defender user, (I always look when you post) and have supported me personally over the years.
I am not an expert. just a Shadow Defender enthusiast like yourself and I have tried to do 'my bit' over the years within my own limitations to help users (and myself), as I believe that Shadow Defender is one of the best pieces of security software of all time, wherever it came from or whoever developed it.
I use Shadow Defender every day and it has served me well and continues to do so. Hundreds of times it has 'saved my neck'. I'd be lost without it.

Best wishes and Happy New Year

Patrick (sdmod)

 

What was the name of this software?

Shadow Defender is also heavily pirated.

 

@sdmod
I was one the first users of ShadowUser by StorageCraft, it was a terrific software doing basically what Shadow Defender does nowadays plus having a persistent reboot in shadow mode. As you say sdmod, piracy killed it, and StorageCraft at the time was heavily promoting its excellent backup program - ShadowProtect, and therefore they abandoned any further development of ShadowUser. I'm shocked to learn what you went through with spammers when you were running the SD forum, some people are really evil, you should be commended for your dedication to this software... I don't know what to think about "Tony", there are so many possibilities, death, illness, censorship, you name it. One thing for sure it would be a pity for this program to become abandonware as it has proven to stand the test of time and MS idiosyncratic upgrades. Let's hope for the best...

 

Yeah, thank you @sdmod for your hard work.Been using Shadow Defender for well over 10 years and as @EASTER said it’s solid as granite.

 

I think that probably is reference to the upstart Shadow Defender 'clone' somewhere on this forum...maybe power shadow... I can't remember the name off hand ,something like that. It was like a Shadow Defender clone-ish
Maybe other members might remember.
At the time members and curious were 'Should we download it? Is it legitimate' Is it safe?'

I mentioned in an earlier post that Shadow Defender when first it appeared was similar in style GUI and function to the heavily pirated Shadowuser Pro. I sometimes wondered if the ups and downs in communication with Shadow Defender admin were because it maybe had been hijacked from ShadowUserCopyright 2004 StorageCraft Technology Corporation™ . The similarity between the legitimate ShadowUser and Shadow Defender and these other 'iterations' was unnerving. There was obviously some strong connection between one and the other.
ShadowUser had a unique existent function ( having a persistent reboot in shadow mode (saving installed progams from Shadow Mode that normally require re-boot to complete full working installation) at that time that Tony promised later to implement in a short time (if I remember correctly, within one month) scale, he tried and couldn't implement it and then without fanfare backed off and withdrew from pursuing it.
At that same time a website sprang up purporting to be a Shadow Defender site. It seems like someone was trying to take advantage of Tony's absence. It was a strange time.
Shadow Defender has always been shrouded in mystery
There have been a few bad or glitchy first releases of Shadow Defender including some more recent ones.
One in particular was a system mangler...although many versions back... I think 1.1.0.331 or maybe 332.
I used to download all new releases straight away and Tony would adjust. In the case of the mangler one he changed it straight away, re-released it immediately without public comment but kept the release number.
He would do that on a few occasions if he acknowledged that there was a definite problem from my emails.
I used the criteria that even if I did not experience a problem myself but enough members mentioned a particular problem I would flag it.
On some occasions changes were not made because, although some members had a similar enough problem for me to flag it, it was talked down, fobbed off, in a semi derisory fashion when discussed on the forum by people who had not experienced the problem themselves and so that was fine for them...so therefore everything must be ok. I understand that we all want things to be ok...but for successful development a developer needs to hear the good and bad experiences from users and an active and receptive developer.
Look at all the bad software that we've seen over the years that stuck out like sore thumb, stayed that way because there was no discussion or input from users and intransigent and inward looking developers.
Think of all the awful GUIs over the years, greyed out buttons and functions that didn't work , input boxes that didn't fit on the screen that arrogant, aloof developers turned a blind eye to in full releases of software without self reproach.
Lots of software transfers of power and ownership that resulted in potential being unrealised.
When I think of that I always thing of PowWow which was a fantastic, lots of fun and useful, late 1990s communications 'chat' software that had everything, very popular but was bought out and immediately dumped and ended almost overnight. I used to talk to people all over he world back then running a cut down version of PowWow from a 1.44 floppy disk. I used Pine and Elm emails in those days. Rocketmail and Hotmail webmail before it was bought by Mickysoft. I'm an old fashioned utilitarian by nature, although I don't disparage 'progress' if it is to our advantage and not to our detriment.
Sorry...rambling again Patrick

 

I just want to follow all three aspects mentioned by Antarctica in the above post.

 

I guess it is possible for any 'Windows' system software to take a tumble or refuse to perform but i found that mostly on Windows end and NOT the software. In my case i been careful not to allow MS to fudge Shadow Defender whatsoever and it's performed as expected flawless since it's inception on this end.

That's quite some track record.

 

@EASTER
Re Shadow Defender glitches
I agree with you EASTER about where the fault lies at times.
Hardware and Operating system aspects of systems are so 'disparate' and software is often victim to it/them.
Remember all the times over the years problems caused by badly made, dis-functional rogue capacitors!
Many software problems were flagged but probably to do (at times) with those capacitors failing
I can understand that software developers do not want to re-gig their software every time someone has a bad ram stick or a card problem or some intermittent hardware disconnect or glitch.
I use XP sp3 as my 'daily' with Shadow Defender and Sandboxie and it is rock solid for me too.
I use Shadow Defender 1.4.0.519.because it has always served me well and there were (for me) one or two old glitches returned (for myself and a number of others) in some later versions. (icon problems icons missing etc etc) Mentioned to Tony at the time but 'shrugged off' and ignored by him. Quite 'defensive' it seemed, of the latest versions and would not acknowledge any retrograde bug in (what they feel is a more refined development) but it happens and I have been there to witness it.
I understand that developers at times of a new release do not want anything to be wrong or past issues to return.
I check files I'm saving before committing with Malwarebytes Anti Malware.
On one of my laptops although, I have Windows 7 installed (with Shadow Defender and Sandboxie etc) I run Tails operating from dvd drive.
I absolutely love it. (my other 'daily') It takes a minute or two to set up each time but one that is done it as good as anything. Tails has it's own safeguards built in by design
Anything that I want to save can be saved from a Tails 'session' to a usb stick (as needed), although I have only personally saved text files etc.
I have last version Linux Mint on my other laptop...fairly up to date version.
Regarding Linux Mint, loved it and had it on a pc but something happened and even though I had snapshots everything ended up being mangled and that pc will now not accept any operating system including Tails. I've spent weeks wrestling with it...formats, partitions, bios settings, the whole works! from diverse angles to no avail. I'm not an expert on Linux just a 'newbie' and when something goes badly wrong have no real experience to fix it. It was a very disappointing experience. I bacame completely deflated after it (almost traumatized) and I'm still worried about re-engaging with it. I know it sounds funny but my confidence in everything took a dive.
I'd been happily using it for quite a while and was considering it to possibly be my new 'daily'..'I'd configured it to my liking and installed various upgrades and software to suit my taste.
Both other PCs have Windows systems. Windows 10 'Ameliorated' with Shadow Defender and Sandboxie installed and Windows 7 Ultimate similarly running Shadow Defender and Sandboxie. Shadow Defender and Sandboxie run well on all the Windows systems.

Sorry to get a bit 'off topic' in this post
One thing tends to bring up another

Patrick (sdmod)

 

Power Shadow was, I'm pleased to say, my discovery, many years ago. I don't remember where or how I found it, but I recall Easter and I wringing it out and posting results on this forum. I think the thread ran over 900 pages. I was running either Win 98 or XP. Many others here back then either tried it or questioned whether it was safe. It was, for the time, a pretty cool software.

I don't have SD installed at the moment, but do have 1.4.0.672 saved to an external with the key. It worked well with my Win 8.1 Pro. Don't know why I removed it, except there seemed to be some sort of conflict with Comodo FW, but I'm not sure. Using Kaspersky Plus now, and I think I'll re-install it. I'd forgotten I had the .exe saved.