CCleaner Erased WRONG partition on WRONG device

CCleaner for Windows CCleaner Windows Bug Reporting
1

I am using Windows 7 Ultimate + SP1, 4 core processor, and CC 3.14.1616 (64bit)

I aimed 1 pass at (J:) a 1 GB Sony Flash Drive, FAT - not FAT32.

Drive Wiper zapped (T:), a 100 MB FAT32 partition on my secondary GPT HDD

Drive Wiper displayed all letters in alphabetic sequence, regardless of device.

The last letter was T:\, and immediately above was J:\

I selected (J:) via Tools / Drive Wiper and checked the box, and confirmed no other boxes were selected.

Then I noticed your default was Wipe Free Space only, so I switched to "Entire Drive (All data will be erased)"

I looked again as I clicked the Wipe Button, and Sony (J:) was still checked.

I typed ERASE and this was quickly completed.

I was surprised by how eager Drive Wiper was to do more work,

Upon completion of Wipe I observed that (J:) was no longer checked,

but T:\ was now checked and ready for zap - I hoped.

I also feared an awful Snafu and that for some reason the check-mark had dropped from (J:) to (T:) whilst I was typing Erase.

Windows Explorer confirmed my worst fears - T:\ was dead as a Dodo, and all files remained on J:\

I have repeated the entire scenario up to but EXCLUDING the entry of the word ERASE,

and the check remained against (J:) and did not drop down to (T:) whilst I was changing the mode from Free Space to Entire Drive.

I am absolutely certain I did NOT accidentally check the bottom box against (T:).

I am human so I can possibly get confused about which letter I check in which box somewhere halfway down a list,

but there is no way I could check the bottom box and wrongly remember checking the box above.

I definitely remember checking the box above the bottom,

therefore if you consistently place (J:) above (T:), I could not have checked anything BUT (J:).

CCleaner made that mistake all by itself.

I very strongly suspect that you forgot what I checked whilst I subsequently switched mode from Free Space to Entire Drive ...,

and then you proceeded on the FALSE default of zapping (T:) but wrongly failing to refresh the display,

instead you left the (J:) box checked until you had zapped (T:) and only then did you show that your target had been (T:).

Being human it is possible that I saw what I expected to see, but I am 90% sure that I was careful because I am always cautious when System C:\ is at risk.

I strongly urge you to prevent your mistakes from hurting your customers,

and also prevent any mistake in the User's perception of the damage you are about to do.

Firstly the "WARNING ALL DATA ON SELECTED DISK DRIVES WILL BE ERASED."

That is TOTALLY INADEQUATE.

You only show a maximum of SIX disc drives. I had 8 - and sometimes I have up to 14.

Drives C:\ and D:\ are missing - out of sight - I cannot see if you think they should be zapped.

You ought to itemize every drive on the death list.

When I type ERASE I could be signing the Death Warrant on (D:) - and even (C:) could go the way that (T:) went :angry:

I also recommend that you no longer require the user to type the word "ERASE",

But instead "ERASE x,y,z:" where x,y,z denotes a comma delimited list of the drives to be zapped,

and that you confirm that the typed list matches the boxes that you consider checked.

I am happy to supply any further information you request,

including a /DEBUG output - but not including an actual erase :)

Regards

Alan

2

OUCH! :huh:

Only question that comes to mind is: "Is this an x64 issue since it executed the x64 of CCleaner and the problem does not exist in x86"?

3

I am wondering if the problem struck due to my target not having a proper MBR and partition, so CCleaner moved on to the next device.

I do not know the state of the Sony device, but it was old and however Sony supplied it originally.

Unfortunately I did not think of testing whether MBR existed until too late,

i.e. after I used the Macrium Partition Image software to convert my Flash into a Boot Recovery device,

so now it includes possession of an MBR even if there was none before the fatal erase.

Most of my career was designing with 8 bit single CPU Real Time operating systems and application code for security systems that just kept on going with zero downtime.

I cannot help thinking that Windows is too ambitious with the hardware it uses,

and it finds an extra 56 bits and an extra 3 cores is to difficult to keep under control - like trying to herd cats :)

4

Would developers or moderators please advise me urgently if any further information will be needed from me.

I will soon be restoring the applications to the partition that was erroneously wiped.

I have no reason to expect my MBR System C:\ partition to survive a CCleaner mistake when told to hit a different partition/device,

until there is an explanation of why CCleaner attacked a partition on my SATA connected GPT drive in mistake for a USB2 connect Flash drive.

Wiping Free Space should still be a fairly safe thing to do - but I am not feeling lucky.

Regards

Alan

5

Nothing required by the mods Alan, we're not in negotiations with the devs on this or any other problem. We help when we can as users but otherwise we exist to admonish miscreants.

6

Nothing required by the mods Alan, we're not in negotiations with the devs on this or any other problem. We help when we can as users but otherwise we exist to admonish miscreants.

Thanks, pecking order duly noted :)

7

Similar to Augeas Alan.

If I had half an idea I would have chipped in, but unfortunately I don't. The devs do pertain to read all posts so it's their choice whether they respond or not.

Saying that, there's nothing stopping any member dropping the devs a pm to ask if they're aware of the issue, with a link to the thread. You put enough time in here to warrant that IMHO.

8

Similar to Augeas Alan.

If I had half an idea I would have chipped in, but unfortunately I don't. The devs do pertain to read all posts so it's their choice whether they respond or not.

Saying that, there's nothing stopping any member dropping the devs a pm to ask if they're aware of the issue, with a link to the thread. You put enough time in here to warrant that IMHO.

Thanks

9

Supplementary information.

My target for erasing was an old USB Flash Drive that was plugged into a USB port socket.

1. Possibly Unreliable USB Socket

Windows Explorer has copied 1 to 6 GB Macrium image files through this USB socket to a USB2 connected HDD,

and Macrium tested the checksums and found corruption, but the original files on my secondary drive were still good.

Since then I have only copied with TeraCopy and that never failed.

I do not know if that indicates the USB socket performed perfectly,

or if the USB caused corruption that was instantly recognised and silently retried

I use TeraCopy because it will gracefully retry when needed,

and additionally omit any inaccessible file and proceed with any others,

and afterwards will use MD5 checksum validation comparison and report on any access etc. failures

2. USB Port interaction with APC battery Backup

I use APC battery Backup with PowerChute Personal Edition connected via USB2 to :-

Generate a pop-up message when the mains supply blows and the system is running on the APC Battery ;

and push / tell / request the Operating system to hibernate / shut-down when the battery is almost exhausted.

3. Microsoft LifeCam VX-7000

Installed under protest so Granma can have video chats with grandchildren

Otherwise not running so far as I know :unsure:

4. USB Port interaction with Zentimo xStorage Manager Version 1.1.6.1090

This gives pop-ups when devices are plugged in, and provides "Safe Removal"

N.B. I have just used Zentimo to perform speed tests on this plus a larger device :-

Sony Storage Media USB Device

MACRIUM_PE (J:), 956.0 MB "FAT32"

Type of file Speed of reading Speed of writing

Small files (32.0 KB): 4.61 MB/s 1.22 MB/s

Medium files (3.0 MB): 12.87 MB/s 3.05 MB/s

Large files (100.0 MB): 13.61 MB/s 3.44 MB/s

USB DISK 2.0 USB Device

USB2 (J:), 7.5 GB "FAT32"

Type of file Speed of reading Speed of writing

Small files (32.0 KB): 6.12 MB/s 1.02 MB/s

Medium files (3.0 MB): 22.56 MB/s 8.98 MB/s

Large files (100.0 MB): 25.17 MB/s 11.25 MB/s

The younger 7.5 GB device is fast and good.

the older 1 GB has two anomalies :

a) The large file test uses two off 100.00 MB files - no problem because there is 600 MB free space

BUT the "speedo" was showing 12 MB/s with the first half of the progress bar,

and then for a long time the speedo dropped to about 2 or 3 MB/s whilst the progress bar completed the second half,

AND IMMEDIATELY progress completed there was a Zentimo error report which I submitted for analysis.

The Sony 1 GB device always gets an error report when it is vertical and plugged into either of the top "roof mounted" connectors,

but no error reports when horizontal and plugged into a rear panel connector

The 7.5 GB device never causes an error report

QUESTION

Is it possible that some "disturbance in the force" occurred after I selected this device (J:) for wiping,

and this momentarily "disconnected" device (J:)

and CCleaner had noted that (J:) was the seventh item in the list of drives,

so CCleaner zapped the latest seventh item which had become (T:) ?

Alan

10

At the risk of sounding like I'm stating the obvious, why do you have two separate drives carrying the letter J Alan?

Like you I have a number of flash drives, and I also have some spare SD cards, and I endeavour to attach a name to them such as "Sandisk 8GB", or "Cannon 1GB", which is useful but I inadvertently assigned a drive letter to a flash drive which was already taken by one of the USB "Removeable Disks", and it caused Windows to cry out in confusion until I rectified that.

Might have sod all to do with what you experienced, but confusing Windows is never a good idea, as you're never sure what it may do.

Just a thought.

11

Natural Windows defaults.

C:\ through to I:\ are all in use by the CD/DVD drive and SATA connected HDD partitions,

so which ever flash is plugged is given J:\

(or K:\ if J:\ is still plugged in)

In today's exercise with two devices, only one at a time was connected.

Zentimo does offer the capability to impose a defined drive letter on any Flash Drive,

but I prefer to avoid all automatic constraints - Windows defaults give me sufficient aggravation without any third party regimentation.

Regards

Alan