Export thread

The result says the highest valid region is almost the same as the declared drive size(268GB), and the validated drive size is 72.8GB, since that is the location of the first red block. There are very few red blocks and all the rest are green. To me, it seems that neither of these numbers are very meaningful, since they only tell you the the locations of the first non-green block and the last green block. It seems to me that the ratio of green blocks to the total number of blocks would tell you the usefulness of the drive. That is, unless the drive pretends to write data into the first red block, as though nothing was wrong, so any data supposedly there, really isn't there, in which case the "validated drive size" is the only meaningful number. Obviously, I could use some help interpreting the results. Should I return this drive to Amazon since it's "validated" size is too small, even though there are very few red blocks?


Report #1
test date and time 11/5/2023 at 6:36 PM
declared drive size 268,435,456,000 (268GB)
validated drive size 72,827,707,392 (72.8GB)
highest valid region 267,968,610,304 (268GB)
hub or drive vendor usb
hub or drive product mass_storage
serial number 00000000000000043e

Let me get this straight...? You INTENTIONALLY bought a bad drive, and now you're asking "Should I return this drive to Amazon ..." Ummm...

In my opinion if you have a drive that reports back with information such as what you are seeing, I would be throwing it out as I wouldn't even want to rely on the "working" storage. Who knows how long it will work for.

Based on the replies, so far, I should rephrase my question. I 'd like to better understand the results of the Validrive test, not just for the one I bought. It's my understanding, based on my listening to the Security Now! podcast since episode 1, that no drive is perfect and that as a drive is used it continuously marks regions bad, as it discovers them, and doesn't reuse them. It also doesn't lie to Windows about it's capacity. Steve created Validrive due to his experience with certain drives that lie to Windows. As Steve says in his intro on the exe "This misrepresentation is diabolical because a drive with much less actual storage will not be detected during normal use by any operating system." So my question can be rephrased as follows: Is the true capacity of a drive with, say, 99% green blocks and 1% red blocks, determined by the location of the first red block (the "validated" size) or by the percentage of green blocks. If the location of the first red block is indeed all that's important, is the reason that the existence of this red block is hidden in such a way that if a user tries to store data on this drive, beyond the "validaded" size, it will appear to be stored, but in fact, will not be stored, which fact will not become evident until the user attempts to read something that was supposedly stored at the location of the first red block?

@Roncerr as per the link James has posted it seems intentional that the first red square controls the validates drive size

• validated drive size – After filling-in the entire drive map, ValiDrive scans from the front of the drive to find the first non-green (non-validated) region. It uses the end of this region as the drive's validated size, which it reports in exact bytes and common units.

Click to expand...

Yes, I saw that. I still would like to know the answer to the rest of my question: "If the location of the first red block is indeed all that's important, is the reason that the existence of this red block is hidden in such a way that if a user tries to store data on this drive, beyond the "validaded" size, it will appear to be stored, but in fact, will not be stored, which fact will not become evident until the user attempts to read something that was supposedly stored at the location of the first red block?"

Can you redo the scan and save then share the .rtf file?

When I tried to do that originally, the picture didn't show up. I'll try it again. See attached .rtf file.

I think the answer is we can't be certain what will happen as that is between the controller and the physical storage - just that it's untrustworthy.

it's likely that in this instance if data was stored in the region approximated by the red square then it possibly wouldn't attempt to store it at all.

Edit: I don't think you attached anything

if you want to go beyond what validrive can show them perhaps something like HW2test might suit to test the drive in its entirety.

Roncerr said:

When I tried to do that originally, the picture didn't show up. I'll try it again. See attached .rtf file.

Click to expand...

Didn't show any attachment. I believe it will let me post the txt version. Let's see.

Yes, only the txt version can be posted in this forum.

But as I said in the first post: "There are very few red blocks and all the rest are green."

Roncerr said:

these numbers are very meaningful

Click to expand...

To me.

Roncerr said:

declared drive size 268,435,456,000 (268GB)
validated drive size 72,827,707,392 (72.8GB)
highest valid region 267,968,610,304 (268GB)

Click to expand...

What these numbers tell me is that this drive is unhealthy, untrustworthy, unreliable. The NAND in this device appears to have serious problems. I would only expect this NAND to continue to degrade. This drive should not be used for data storage.

ValiDrive apparently uses the first red area to calculate its "validated" drive size. This works well for clear obvious fakes, but not so much for troubled drives with failing NAND.

Roncerr said:

Didn't show any attachment.

Click to expand...

You should be able to post the full report with the drive map image.

DanR said:

You should be able to post the full report with the drive map image.

Click to expand...

Based on my attempts, I can't. Can you post an rtf file (or any image file) to show us it can be done. Then I'll reformat the file the same way, and post it. Thanks.

Example Image Attached

DanR said:

To me.

What these numbers tell me is that this drive is unhealthy, untrustworthy, unreliable. The NAND in this device appears to have serious problems. I would only expect this NAND to continue to degrade. This drive should not be used for data storage.

ValiDrive apparently uses the highest validated green area to calculate its "validated" drive size. This works well for clear obvious fakes, but not so much for troubled drives with failing NAND.

Click to expand...

I fully agree with your second sentence.

James Stockton said:

Example Image Attached

Click to expand...

Thanks. I copied the rtf with snipping tool and saved it as a png. See attached.

Unless your keeping it for research I would return this drive to Amazon.

James Stockton said:

Unless your keeping it for research I would return this drive to Amazon.

Click to expand...

Thanks for answering my first question. The second is equally important to me, and, although long, it's phrased as a yes or no question: "If the location of the first red block is indeed all that's important, is the reason that the existence of this red block is hidden in such a way that if a user tries to store data on this drive, beyond the "validaded" size, it will appear to be stored, but in fact, will not be stored, which fact will not become evident until the user attempts to read something that was supposedly stored at the location of the first red block?"

A simpler, third question might be: Can I tell Amazon that the drive will definitely not store more than 72.8 GB, even though it was sold as 256 GB.

Beyond the validated size data may appear to write, but cannot be read back, the data enters a void of nothingness. Because there are a few red blocks before the end of the validated size suggests failing NAND or a FIRMWARE issue. Who knows what else is wrong with it since Validrive just checks if its a fake.

Roncerr said:

A simpler, third question might be: Can I tell Amazon that the drive will definitely not store more than 72.8 GB, even though it was sold as 256 GB.

Click to expand...

They won't know what Validrive is or care. It's simpler just to return it as defective goods.

Roncerr said:

The second is equally important to me, and, although long, it's phrased as a yes or no question: "If the location of the first red block is indeed all that's important, is the reason that the existence of this red block is hidden in such a way that if a user tries to store data on this drive, beyond the "validaded" size, it will appear to be stored, but in fact, will not be stored

Click to expand...

The red areas ares red because ValiDrive can NOT write to them. Neither will anything else. So the answer to your question is a Yes.

Roncerr said:

third question might be: Can I tell Amazon that the drive will definitely not store more than 72.8 GB, even though it was sold as 256 GB

Click to expand...

268 GB is a definitely odd size. Such drives do not exist. Your data tells you two things: The drive is fake. And, the combination of hacked firmware and possibly failing NAND are producing weird results.

As James S said, just return it as defective goods.

Keep in mind that the red squares represent a very small part of the drive as each drive is broken up into 500ish testing spots at random.

So it may show as 1 red square here or there but that could be a large portion of the drive that's not available and therefore a much more serious issue.

James Stockton said:

They won't know what Validrive is or care. It's simpler just to return it as defective goods.

Click to expand...

I agree. They are very good about accepting returns for any reason, within the first 30 days. I 'd like to be able to say that it failed to store more than about 73 GB because files stored above that amount could not be retrieved. (I don't have to mention Validrive in the actual return note, which, as you say, may not be read anyway. During Steve's podcast he said that he was told Amazon would not allow a negative review, based on Validrive. I'd like to try a negative review as well. If enough people make similar bad reviews, with or without mentioning Validrive, perhaps one of Amazon's employees will alert them to the problem, and they'll screen their drive sellers for unethical practices.

DarkwinX said:

Keep in mind that the red squares represent a very small part of the drive as each drive is broken up into 500ish testing spots at random.

So it may show as 1 red square here or there but that could be a large portion of the drive that's not available and therefore a much more serious issue.

Click to expand...

Perhaps that's why Steve included the statistical analysis, to justify that his results truly represent the state of the drive.

Roncerr said:

There are very few red blocks and all the rest are green.

Click to expand...

Please reboot your computer and try again. You may be running into a bug in ValiDrive.

ColbyBouma said:

Please reboot your computer and try again. You may be running into a bug in ValiDrive.

https://forums.grc.com/threads/validrive-says-the-drive-is-great-but-its-actually-not.1286/post-9766

Click to expand...

Thanks. I ran the the test on the drive 4 times, each time the "validated size" was different: See Attached. The two things they agree upon is that the last block is red and there are many more green blocks than red blocks. Doesn't this invalidate Validrive?

Roncerr said:

Doesn't this invalidate Validrive?

Click to expand...

No. Stop expecting the same results. The USB flash drive is clearly a fake and totally faulty.

James Stockton said:

No. Stop expecting the same results. The USB flash drive is clearly a fake and totally faulty.

Click to expand...

So you (and Mr Starfish) are saying the location of the first red block and the "validated" drive size can change. If so, then Vaidrive should simply say, it's a fake drive or faulty without saying there IS any particular validated size. I wonder if Steve is aware of the possible changes in the number and locations of the red blocks. If he is, I would certainly appreciate such a warning in the tutorial that pops up when running Validrive, along with a possible explanation of how this can happen.

GRC software is provided as-is. It's very difficult to request changes to finished projects.

Roncerr said:

Thanks. I ran the the test on the drive 4 times, each time the "validated size" was different: See Attached. The two things they agree upon is that the last block is red and there are many more green blocks than red blocks. Doesn't this invalidate Validrive?

Click to expand...

It looks like Steve already addressed this issue: https://forums.grc.com/threads/validrive-results-differ-each-run.1332/#post-9756 . His reply does explain what's going on. I can only hope that Version 2, which Steve has been threatening to create, will do away with the unfortunate phrase "validated drive size".

Roncerr said:

His reply does explain what's going on. I can only hope that Version 2, which Steve has been threatening to create, will do away with the unfortunate phrase "validated drive size".

Click to expand...

Point taken @Roncerr. Thanks!