Can recover data from disk but not from image of same disk?











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












So I'm creating this training scenario whereby participants have to take an image of a broken disk, loop mount and recover the data. It's supposed to be fairly basic, but I've come accross this weird issue.



There's this drive /dev/vdb:



[root@training ~]# fdisk -l /dev/vdb

Disk /dev/vdb: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes, 41943040 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


First I take an image and make sure the md5sum of both the image and drive match:



[root@disk-training ~]# dd if=/dev/vdb of=/recovery/recovery.img conv=sync,notrunc,noerror
10485760+0 records in
10485760+0 records out
5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB) copied, 64.6406 s, 83.1 MB/s

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/vdb
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /recovery/recovery.img
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /recovery/recovery.img


Next, to ensure no caches confuse the situation, I drop them:



[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches


Using a mix of testdisk to recover the partition and fsck to recover the filesystem, I can retrieve the file:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/vdb
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/vdb1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
/dev/vdb1 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced.
Resize inode not valid. Recreate? yes
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (23896, counted=23897).
Fix? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #1 (32127, counted=32126).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong for group #0 (8181, counted=8180).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong (327669, counted=327668).
Fix? yes
/dev/vdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/vdb1: 12/327680 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 58463/1309696 blocks

[root@disk-training ~]# mount /dev/vdb1 /mnt/

[root@disk-training ~]# ls -l /mnt/file
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 Dec 12 15:41 /mnt/file


So that's all good. So I set up the image as a loop device and do another md5sum to be sure:



[root@disk-training ~]# losetup /dev/loop0 /recovery/recovery.img

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/loop0
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/loop0


Now if I run the same process on this, it doesn't succeed:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/loop0
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/loop0

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/loop0p1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
fsck.ext2: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>


And here's some basic troubleshooting I've done:



[root@disk-training ~]# dumpe2fs /dev/loop0p1
dumpe2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
dumpe2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1
Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock.

[root@disk-training ~]# mke2fs -n /dev/loop0p1
mke2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=4096 (log=2)
Fragment size=4096 (log=2)
Stride=0 blocks, Stripe width=0 blocks
327680 inodes, 1309696 blocks
65484 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
Maximum filesystem blocks=1342177280
40 block groups
32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group
8192 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736


[root@disk-training ~]# for i in {32768,98304,163840,229376,294912,819200,884736}; do e2fsck -b $i /dev/loop0p1; done
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>

e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2

......


I'm really confused by the results of this and wonder if someone can explain to me what is going on.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
    – frostschutz
    yesterday

















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












So I'm creating this training scenario whereby participants have to take an image of a broken disk, loop mount and recover the data. It's supposed to be fairly basic, but I've come accross this weird issue.



There's this drive /dev/vdb:



[root@training ~]# fdisk -l /dev/vdb

Disk /dev/vdb: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes, 41943040 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


First I take an image and make sure the md5sum of both the image and drive match:



[root@disk-training ~]# dd if=/dev/vdb of=/recovery/recovery.img conv=sync,notrunc,noerror
10485760+0 records in
10485760+0 records out
5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB) copied, 64.6406 s, 83.1 MB/s

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/vdb
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /recovery/recovery.img
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /recovery/recovery.img


Next, to ensure no caches confuse the situation, I drop them:



[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches


Using a mix of testdisk to recover the partition and fsck to recover the filesystem, I can retrieve the file:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/vdb
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/vdb1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
/dev/vdb1 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced.
Resize inode not valid. Recreate? yes
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (23896, counted=23897).
Fix? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #1 (32127, counted=32126).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong for group #0 (8181, counted=8180).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong (327669, counted=327668).
Fix? yes
/dev/vdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/vdb1: 12/327680 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 58463/1309696 blocks

[root@disk-training ~]# mount /dev/vdb1 /mnt/

[root@disk-training ~]# ls -l /mnt/file
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 Dec 12 15:41 /mnt/file


So that's all good. So I set up the image as a loop device and do another md5sum to be sure:



[root@disk-training ~]# losetup /dev/loop0 /recovery/recovery.img

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/loop0
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/loop0


Now if I run the same process on this, it doesn't succeed:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/loop0
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/loop0

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/loop0p1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
fsck.ext2: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>


And here's some basic troubleshooting I've done:



[root@disk-training ~]# dumpe2fs /dev/loop0p1
dumpe2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
dumpe2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1
Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock.

[root@disk-training ~]# mke2fs -n /dev/loop0p1
mke2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=4096 (log=2)
Fragment size=4096 (log=2)
Stride=0 blocks, Stripe width=0 blocks
327680 inodes, 1309696 blocks
65484 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
Maximum filesystem blocks=1342177280
40 block groups
32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group
8192 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736


[root@disk-training ~]# for i in {32768,98304,163840,229376,294912,819200,884736}; do e2fsck -b $i /dev/loop0p1; done
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>

e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2

......


I'm really confused by the results of this and wonder if someone can explain to me what is going on.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
    – frostschutz
    yesterday















up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











So I'm creating this training scenario whereby participants have to take an image of a broken disk, loop mount and recover the data. It's supposed to be fairly basic, but I've come accross this weird issue.



There's this drive /dev/vdb:



[root@training ~]# fdisk -l /dev/vdb

Disk /dev/vdb: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes, 41943040 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


First I take an image and make sure the md5sum of both the image and drive match:



[root@disk-training ~]# dd if=/dev/vdb of=/recovery/recovery.img conv=sync,notrunc,noerror
10485760+0 records in
10485760+0 records out
5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB) copied, 64.6406 s, 83.1 MB/s

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/vdb
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /recovery/recovery.img
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /recovery/recovery.img


Next, to ensure no caches confuse the situation, I drop them:



[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches


Using a mix of testdisk to recover the partition and fsck to recover the filesystem, I can retrieve the file:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/vdb
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/vdb1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
/dev/vdb1 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced.
Resize inode not valid. Recreate? yes
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (23896, counted=23897).
Fix? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #1 (32127, counted=32126).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong for group #0 (8181, counted=8180).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong (327669, counted=327668).
Fix? yes
/dev/vdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/vdb1: 12/327680 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 58463/1309696 blocks

[root@disk-training ~]# mount /dev/vdb1 /mnt/

[root@disk-training ~]# ls -l /mnt/file
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 Dec 12 15:41 /mnt/file


So that's all good. So I set up the image as a loop device and do another md5sum to be sure:



[root@disk-training ~]# losetup /dev/loop0 /recovery/recovery.img

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/loop0
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/loop0


Now if I run the same process on this, it doesn't succeed:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/loop0
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/loop0

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/loop0p1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
fsck.ext2: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>


And here's some basic troubleshooting I've done:



[root@disk-training ~]# dumpe2fs /dev/loop0p1
dumpe2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
dumpe2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1
Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock.

[root@disk-training ~]# mke2fs -n /dev/loop0p1
mke2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=4096 (log=2)
Fragment size=4096 (log=2)
Stride=0 blocks, Stripe width=0 blocks
327680 inodes, 1309696 blocks
65484 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
Maximum filesystem blocks=1342177280
40 block groups
32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group
8192 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736


[root@disk-training ~]# for i in {32768,98304,163840,229376,294912,819200,884736}; do e2fsck -b $i /dev/loop0p1; done
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>

e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2

......


I'm really confused by the results of this and wonder if someone can explain to me what is going on.










share|improve this question







New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











So I'm creating this training scenario whereby participants have to take an image of a broken disk, loop mount and recover the data. It's supposed to be fairly basic, but I've come accross this weird issue.



There's this drive /dev/vdb:



[root@training ~]# fdisk -l /dev/vdb

Disk /dev/vdb: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes, 41943040 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes


First I take an image and make sure the md5sum of both the image and drive match:



[root@disk-training ~]# dd if=/dev/vdb of=/recovery/recovery.img conv=sync,notrunc,noerror
10485760+0 records in
10485760+0 records out
5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB) copied, 64.6406 s, 83.1 MB/s

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/vdb
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /recovery/recovery.img
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /recovery/recovery.img


Next, to ensure no caches confuse the situation, I drop them:



[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
[root@disk-training ~]# sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches


Using a mix of testdisk to recover the partition and fsck to recover the filesystem, I can retrieve the file:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/vdb
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/vdb

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/vdb1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
/dev/vdb1 was not cleanly unmounted, check forced.
Resize inode not valid. Recreate? yes
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
Pass 4: Checking reference counts
Pass 5: Checking group summary information
Free blocks count wrong for group #0 (23896, counted=23897).
Fix? yes
Free blocks count wrong for group #1 (32127, counted=32126).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong for group #0 (8181, counted=8180).
Fix? yes
Free inodes count wrong (327669, counted=327668).
Fix? yes
/dev/vdb1: ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
/dev/vdb1: 12/327680 files (0.0% non-contiguous), 58463/1309696 blocks

[root@disk-training ~]# mount /dev/vdb1 /mnt/

[root@disk-training ~]# ls -l /mnt/file
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 Dec 12 15:41 /mnt/file


So that's all good. So I set up the image as a loop device and do another md5sum to be sure:



[root@disk-training ~]# losetup /dev/loop0 /recovery/recovery.img

[root@disk-training ~]# md5sum /dev/loop0
08452c6ca60007e69694e7e96258554d /dev/loop0


Now if I run the same process on this, it doesn't succeed:



[root@disk-training ~]# testdisk /dev/loop0
TestDisk 7.0, Data Recovery Utility, April 2015
Christophe GRENIER <grenier@cgsecurity.org>
http://www.cgsecurity.org
You have to reboot for the change to take effect.

[root@disk-training ~]# partprobe /dev/loop0

[root@disk-training ~]# fsck -y /dev/loop0p1
fsck from util-linux 2.23.2
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
ext2fs_open2: Bad magic number in super-block
fsck.ext2: Superblock invalid, trying backup blocks...
fsck.ext2: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>


And here's some basic troubleshooting I've done:



[root@disk-training ~]# dumpe2fs /dev/loop0p1
dumpe2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
dumpe2fs: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1
Couldn't find valid filesystem superblock.

[root@disk-training ~]# mke2fs -n /dev/loop0p1
mke2fs 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=4096 (log=2)
Fragment size=4096 (log=2)
Stride=0 blocks, Stripe width=0 blocks
327680 inodes, 1309696 blocks
65484 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
Maximum filesystem blocks=1342177280
40 block groups
32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group
8192 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736


[root@disk-training ~]# for i in {32768,98304,163840,229376,294912,819200,884736}; do e2fsck -b $i /dev/loop0p1; done
e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
e2fsck -b 8193 <device>

e2fsck 1.42.9 (28-Dec-2013)
e2fsck: Invalid argument while trying to open /dev/loop0p1

The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2

......


I'm really confused by the results of this and wonder if someone can explain to me what is going on.







data-recovery dd disk testdisk






share|improve this question







New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









Harry Goodman

61




61




New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
    – frostschutz
    yesterday




















  • not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
    – frostschutz
    yesterday


















not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
– frostschutz
yesterday






not your problem but something to look out for anyway: dd noerror sync might cause data to go to the wrong offsets superuser.com/a/1075837/195171 - use ddrescue instead
– frostschutz
yesterday












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote













Turns out that the image loses its drive geometery, causing testdisk to recover an incorrect partition. Using testdisk to set the number of heads above 1 seemed to fix it.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "106"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Harry Goodman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f487951%2fcan-recover-data-from-disk-but-not-from-image-of-same-disk%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Turns out that the image loses its drive geometery, causing testdisk to recover an incorrect partition. Using testdisk to set the number of heads above 1 seemed to fix it.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Turns out that the image loses its drive geometery, causing testdisk to recover an incorrect partition. Using testdisk to set the number of heads above 1 seemed to fix it.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        Turns out that the image loses its drive geometery, causing testdisk to recover an incorrect partition. Using testdisk to set the number of heads above 1 seemed to fix it.






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        Turns out that the image loses its drive geometery, causing testdisk to recover an incorrect partition. Using testdisk to set the number of heads above 1 seemed to fix it.







        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer






        New contributor




        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        answered yesterday









        Harry Goodman

        61




        61




        New contributor




        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.





        New contributor





        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        Harry Goodman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






















            Harry Goodman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Harry Goodman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Harry Goodman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Harry Goodman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f487951%2fcan-recover-data-from-disk-but-not-from-image-of-same-disk%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            サソリ

            広島県道265号伴広島線

            Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux