IDrive Backup Review

It works and I like it.  IDrive is a backup and file-sync facility with lots of good features, supporting a wide array of computer operating systems and mobile devices.  The features that I particularly like are:

• The command-line options that allow me to incorporate this cloud backup facility into the rest of our normal, every-night archive system; and
• The sophisticated incremental backup features which back up only the files which have been modified since the last backup, and then back up only the modified sectors of large modified files.

Example: I have one 2 GB encrypted file which gets modified every day, but only a little.  At DSL upload speeds it took hours to upload that file the first time, but IDrive can upload the daily modifications in just a few minutes.   A download "restore" of last night's uploaded file confirms that it compares perfectly with the current file, bit for bit, all 2 GB.  I used the Windows comp program for that comparison (several times for several downloads), but also if the file was at all corrupt I would not be able to decrypt it, and it decrypts just fine.

Desktop Application:

IDrive has both a GUI desktop application and a brower-based application, with similar but not identical functionalities.  It took me a little while to get used to the two and determine which to use for what purpose.  There are similar applications for many different computer operating systems and mobile devices.  I was able to install and use the GUI desktop app on Windows XP Pro, Vista Ultimate, Windows 7, and Windows 8.1, with no obvious differences in functionality.

Speed:

Although upload appears to go as fast as my DSL link allows, about 900 kbps or about 3 hours per GB, download through the GUI desktop application appears to be throttled to about 5 Mbps, roughly 2 GB per hour.  My DSL is about three times that fast, almost 16 Mbps, so it should go faster, as do most other downloads.  The browser-based application actually downloads a little faster than the GUI desktop application, maybe 25% faster when restoring my 2 GB encrypted file, finishing the download in 45 minutes instead of 57, though this is still well below half of the maximum speed of the DSL connection.

IDrive isn't very expensive, $37.12 per year for 300 GB, but I am still using the free version because we don't yet need the extra space or features of the professional versions.  Perhaps download speed is throttled for freeloaders like myself - I don't know, and I wouldn't blame them.  It's not an issue in our application, though, because file recovery will be seldom if at all, mostly just for testing, and at 2 GB per hour it won't require more than two or three hours to download everything we have up there in any case.

Technical Support:

Excellent so far - I've had two interactions with them, one via chat and another through a submitted bug report.  They know that I have a free account, I'm sure, but seem interested in solving my problems anyway.  There is also a forum, in which IDrive participates quite actively.  I submitted one problem there and was soon advised to submit the problem as a regular bug report.

Hints:

Command-line options are implemented through a program called idevsutil.exe, found in the IDrive programs folders (C:\Program Files (x86)\IDriveWindows\... in Windows).  However the one that is supplied by the IDrive installer didn't actually work - I had to go to the Getting Started page and download the idevsutil.exe that actually does work.

Cloud backup provides the ultimate off-site backup, to protect against a disaster such as fire, flood, theft, even death of a principal person.  However, it's no good if the files are inaccessible due to a lost usrname or password.  Be sure to have those somewhere else safe, perhaps in a safe deposit box.

LG Blu-Ray Disc Rewriter Model WH16NS40 Review

This is an internal drive which can write and read virtually all forms of CD, DVD, and Blu-Ray (BD) discs, including four-layer 128GB BDs.  It works perfectly so far.

Test System: 

LG Blu-Ray Write/Read Drive
Model WH16NS40

Seven-year-old mini-tower computer, home-built from an Intel DP35DP motherboard hosting an E6750 CPU with dual 2.66 GHz processors, 8 GB memory at 800 MHz, system bus 1066 MHz, running Windows Vista Ultimate. Hard disks are SATA 2TB Seagate hybrid disks.

The system is used as a computer, not as a video player. This review is about data backup. It should apply to copying video files as well, but you might want a newer, faster CPU to actually play or manipulate the video files.  The owners' manual lists the E6750 CPU at 2.66 GHz as the minimum system.

The originally-installed Samsung SH-203B DVD Drive is still in place and functioning well after seven years.  It can read and write DVD+R DL (dual layer) discs, though I only use it with standard and archival single-layer DVD's.  Each month, sometimes more often, I create a backup copy of our own important files (not system files or application executables) on a MAM-A DVD-R gold archival disc for long-term storage, then copy that disc to regular DVD's for shorter-term offsite storage.  Those important files have grown beyond the DVD's 4.7GB capacity, however, so the new LG Blu-Ray Disc (BD) Drive will bump that limit up to about 25GB.  A firmware update from version 1.00 to 1.01-A0 is available for the drive but not yet installed.  (First rule of life:  If it works, you can't fix it.)

Test Method:

The new BD drive was installed in the mini-tower just below the DVD drive.  The generic
Windows Vista software was used to write each disc initially.  ISO Recorder 3.1 was used to restore each disc back to an ISO file, or to write that out to another disc. The following tests were performed to demonstrate single-drive data integrity as well as cross-drive data integrity:

• CD read:  On the BD drive, restore two of our oldest archival CD's, going back to 1997.  No read errors.  Open a few files to verify data integrity.

• CD write/read, using Verbatim CD-R discs:  Write a disc on each drive, restore each disc back to a desktop ISO file using each drive (four ISO files).  No errors reported.  With the Windows utility called comp, compare the two ISO's which were created from a disc written on one drive and restored from the other.  This is a byte-for-byte comparison, and no differences were reported.

• DVD write/read, using TDK DVD-R discs:  Same procedure as for CD's.  No errors, no differences.

• DVD+R DL write/read, using Verbatim DVD+R DL discs:  Same procedure as for CD's.  The discs were filled to about 5.25GB, so that both disc layers would be used.  No errors, no differences.

• BD-R write/read, using Verbatim 25GB 6x BD-R discs:  Write a disc containing 21 GB of data including thousands of files (photos).  Restore that back to an ISO.  Write the ISO to another BD-R disc, restore that back to a second ISO, compare.  No errors, no differences.

• BD-R 50GB, 100GB, and 128GB: Not tested - I don't need this functionality now, but I have no reason to doubt that it will work when it is needed, and perhaps disc prices will be better.

Data integrity test results:

The LG Blu-Ray Disc Rewriter Model WH16NS40 performed perfectly.  I am impressed, and I now have renewed confidence in the old Samsung DVD drive as well.

Vista Speed-display Issue:

On this "old" Vista system the writing speed, estimated time left, and progress bar were all displayed incorrectly for the BD discs.  Specifically, the Windows software reported that it intended to write at 39x, and the ISO Recorder program thought it would write at 351x.  I seriously doubt that either was correct.

For both drives and all discs, I always allowed the write to take place at the maximum displayed speed (i.e. 39x or 351x), not attempting to reduce it.  I have no idea what the actual write speed was for the BD discs, and I did not time any of the operations, but the data files were obviously recorded without error.

First actual Blu-Ray backup:

• Write encrypted and unencrypted files to a Delkin 6x 25GB Archival Gold BD-R.
• Restore that disc back to the desktop as an ISO file.
• Write that ISO to each of three Verbatim 6x 25GB BD-R discs for offsite storage.
• Open and verify some encrypted files on the last of those discs as a final check.

This procedure worked flawlessly, backing up about 12GB, except that one of the Verbatim BD-R discs failed immediately when ISO Recorder 3.1 tried to write to it.  That one disc was discarded with no attempt at diagnosis.  I attribute the failure to the disc, not the drive, and comments on other blogs confirm that such failures can occur.

I believe that this process creates archival Blu-Ray discs which will last at least as long as there are drives capable of reading them.  The Delkin Archival Gold BD-R discs cost me about $10 each in a pack of of 5, and the Verbatim BD-R discs about $1 each in a spindle of 25.  Both are cheaper in larger quantities, and other brands are available.  The LG Owner's Manual recommends Sony and Panasonic discs for BD-R 25GB, but does not say whether Delkin or Verbatim discs were ever tested.

Blu-Ray versus Flash for Archival Storage:

Removable-media technology seems to be moving away from optical discs and toward USB flash drives these days, and video is increasingly downloadable, so Blu-Ray discs may never enjoy the popularity of DVD's.  Flash for archival storage is controversial, however, and it is still at least as expensive as Blu-Ray for similar capacity, so Blu-Ray is a better choice for now.

TrueCrypt Is Cool

My business requires me to safeguard the security of certain files. For years I have used Encrypted Magic Folders (EMF) from PC-Magic to encrypt those files, and to hide them from the view of an interloper. I loved it, because files were always encrypted on disk and yet were fully accessible to applications. However, when I upgraded to Vista 64, the new EMF crashed my system so completely that it was unbootable even in safe mode. I tried it twice, recovered twice with some difficulty, and gave up on EMF.

In the meantime I had heard about TrueCrypt, an open-source disk encryption package for Windows and Linux. It's free! I must admit that after I downloaded it, I needed some time to get my mind around it.

Here are the basics:

• Using the TrueCrypt application you create a large "container" file on your system, larger than you will need to hold your encrypted files. It can be on any read/write disk, even a memory stick, and is initially filled with random data.
• The container file can be copied, moved, deleted, or renamed just like any other file. It's not fragile. It can have any name and any file extension. You can have more than one.
• With the TrueCrypt application, you mount that container file as a disk volume with its own drive letter. You choose the letter.
• The TrueCrypt application runs in the background and manages TrueCrypt volumes.
• Within the TrueCrypt volume you create folders, or copy them in, and create or copy in any files that ought to be encrypted. A TrueCrypt volume behaves exactly like any other disk, even though it's really just a file on your hard drive or mem stick. Every file within it is totally encrypted, including file names and even its file system.
• Unused space in the TrueCrypt container file is filled with random data which cannot be distinguished from actual encrypted files.
• When you open an encrypted file in an application, such as a wordprocessor or graphic editor, the file is decrypted on the fly so that the application sees it decrypted.
• The file is never decrypted on disk, however, unless the application keeps temporary backup copies, and of course you should tell your applications to keep those in an encrypted volume too.
• Backup of encrypted data is easy: Just dismount the encrypted volume and copy its container file, still encrypted, to the backup medium.
• If the backup medium is another disk, mem stick, DVD, or CD-ROM, you can actually mount that backup container file whenever you want without ever copying it back to the original hard disk.

That's the simple view of TrueCrypt. There is lots more. For example:

• Anyone examining your system or your disk can tell that you use TrueCrypt, and can probably even identify the container files.
• However, you can host a TrueCrypt volume within another truecrypt volume in a manner that makes the internal volume both hidden and undectable even if the outer volume is mounted and visible. Really cool. The TrueCrypt people call this "plausible deniability," and consider it quite important.
• Example: An adversary points a gun at you and demands to see your encrypted files. You can give them the password to the outer encrypted volume without ever revealing that an inner, hidden volume even exists. It's invisible. I don't actually see the need for a hidden volume in my business, but evidently some folks do.
• You can host a truecrypt volume on a public computer, or another person's computer, without installing any software on that computer, so your encrypted files are portable.
• You can tell TrueCrypt to mount certain TrueCrypt volumes automatically at bootup, though you will be required to enter a password to complete the mounting process.
• TrueCrypt allows you to use any of eight different encryption algorithms and three different hash algorithms, making decryption by an adversary even more difficult.

I love it, and in fact am using it for my encrypted files on my new computer. It works very well indeed, even on Vista 64. It is certainly no more trouble than EMF was, and backup is much simpler. It is far better than Windows Encrypted File System (EFS) because: (1) EFS files are always available when you log on, whereas TrueCrypt files require you to enter another password; and (2) EFS files cannot easily be backed up in their encrypted form. TrueCrypt is also much simpler than Windows BitLocker encryption, which requires you to partition your drive and poses some risk of losing the entire drive if something goes wrong.

RAID Backup

Working perfectly!

Usually, a person needs a backup when their disk drive fails. All disk drives fail sometime - there is no escape from that truth. But there are other reasons for keeping good backups:

• Total disaster, such as a fire or flood that destroys the whole computer and all nearby backups.
• Deliberate mischief, such as a virus that deletes important files.
• Accidental deletion or modification of one or more files.

I'm sure there are more reasons, but if we cover these we'll probably have the rest covered.

Drive Failure:

Disk drive failure can mostly be avoided by using two mirrored drives in a configuration known as RAID 1. RAID means Redundant Array of Independent Drives, and has several well-defined levels. RAID 1 is a simple comfiguration with two drives which always contain exactly the same information, hence the term "mirrored." If either drive fails, the other simply becomes the system's sole drive and takes over without a hitch. Since the probability of two drives failing at once is very small, RAID 1 pretty well covers that problem. The new computer here employs RAID 1.

Total Disaster:

If the building burns down or floods, the only solution is to have a separate backup stored offsite. This can be on the internet, another building some distance away, or perhaps in a fire- and water-proof safe. At this office a flood is highly unlikely, so we store encrypted DVD backups of most user files in a fire-resistant safe in the basement, and we occasionally put a DVD in a safe deposit box at the bank. I have just set up an upload account and I may stop putting DVDs in the safe deposit box. We'll see.

Deliberate Mischief, or Accidental Deletion or Modification:

RAID disks don't help here, because the RAID disk controller keeps the two mirrored disks identical even when the files themselves are deleted or corrupted. This is where Windows System Restore can be very handy indeed. I have several times seen a serious problem solved by restoring a system to a previous date and time. System Restore works, though it has the disadvantage that the whole drive reverts to a selected time in the past, even if you only need to recover one file.

But if System Restore isn't the solution, then backups are the answer. DVD and internet backups can be used to restore user data, but what about all of the rest of the system? I started a full backup once, but quit when the backup wizard pointed out that I would need 19 DVDs. Enter "RAID Backup" with a third identical disk drive. At some reasonable interval (every day, every week, every month) I can disconnect the power to one of the two mirrored disks and connect the third disk. The disconnected disk is instantly a complete backup of everything, and the newly-connected disk will soon be overwritten and re-mirrored to the remaining good disk in the RAID 1 pair. Voila - complete backup in about five minutes for a one-time cost of about $80. It does actually take about 2 hours and 15 minutes to re-mirror, but the system is usable, if slower, while that takes place. And the third disk, with no power, is safe from any mischief.

It Works!:

I wasn't entirely sure that the Intel software would be totally cool with what I wanted to do, but I tried it last night and today. The system has three identical 320 Mb Western Digital hard disk. Steps in the experiment:

• Disk Drives A and B were mirrored, drive C was powered up as a spare but had never been used.
• I shut down the computer, disconnected power on B, rebooted the computer. The Bios complained that the RAID 1 pair was "degraded" and gave me a chance to deal with it in the Bios, but I declined and let the bootup proceed.
• The computer booted normally, and the Intel monitor software presented a pop-up balloon that said the RAID 1 disk was degraded but could be repaired.
• I clicked on the balloon and followed the instructions to restore disk C to mirror the good disk in the RAID pair, disk A. Two and a quarter hours later, A & C were a mirrored RAID pair and B was a complete backup. Job done.
• As an experiment, however, I shut down again and disconnected all EXCEPT disk B, then rebooted. Again the Bios complained and the on-line software did too, but the system functioned normally on just the "backup" disk. As far as I could tell, all files were accessible. The RAID software, apparently confused, also created a second RAID array at this point, consisting of Disk B and a "missing" disk. Duh.
• I rebooted with only A & C connected, and everything worked once again, no complaints.
• Then I connected B as well, rebooted, and got some complaints about a degraded pair in the second RAID array (disk B), but the system ran normally and all files on all disks seemed to be accessible, including the files on disk B.
• Finally, I disconnected disk C, leaving A & B connected, and rebooted once again. The Bios and the Intel application software both complained about degraded RAID arrays. But it allowed me to delete the second RAID array, consisting of only disk B. That done, it allowed me to re-mirror B to the good disk in the original RAID pair, disk A, even though disk B contained lots of valid data. I was concerned that it might not let me destroy data, and I think there were at least four warnings that data would be destroyed on disk B if I proceeded, but it finally let me do it. Now disk C is again the full backup and the system is back to a RAID array of disks A & B.

From now on the procedure will be much simpler: Shut down, disconnect B or C (whichever was connected), reconnect the disk that was disconnected, reboot, and tell the Intel application to restore the RAID array. The biggest hassle is moving the computer to a position where I can open the side panel and disconnect / reconnect drives. I can handle it.

Windows Experience Index:

Before these little experiments, the system's Windows Experience Index was 5.4, limited by the disk subscore of 5.4. I ran the tests several times. Since the experiments, the Windows Experience Index is 5.5, limited by both the processor and gaming graphics, with the disk subscore improving to 5.7. Why did the disk subscore go up from 5.4 to 5.7, using exactly the same disks? Only Microsoft knows.