Jump to content

File Names and Folder Locations


Recommended Posts

Recovering files using Recuva, I noticed that the file names and folder locations were not preserved, and looking into it via the Internet it seems to be common place. What I resolved to do is look into how the recycle bin works, whether or not there was program to reverse the rename, etc, etc, etc.. All names and locations seemed lost until I found something that seemed exploitable. Apparently, the Recycle bin does away with file names and locations as soon as it hits the folder itself, but only appears to be preserved with the aid of a second file it makes known commonly as Info2. First I tried putting a file into the recycle bin along with it's counter part, but alls that did is separate each part twice more. Another thing I had noticed in the process of learning about the recycle bin is that CMD, when used to delete (del), bypasses the recycle bins process. So, what I did to return my file names and locations is simply use CMD to copy all of the files along with their Info2s into the recycle bin, and then use the recycle bin to restore them in their original name and place.


TLDR - To restore file names and locations:


Recover files along with their counterparts (prefixed by $R and $I followed by the same name) to their own folder


Using CMD with administrative permissions, XCOPY files from recover folder to Recycle Bin folder


Restore files from Recycle Bin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

You're confusing XP and its successors. The INFO2 file is part of XP and not used in Vista onwards. $R and $I are the Vista equivalents. If copying the $R and $I files back to the recycler works, then by all means use it - at your own risk. I don't know whether this would ever be implemented in Recuva.


Although Windows renames the files sent to the Recycler, Recuva shows them in their original file name in XP, which is what I use. I don't know what it uses in Vista onwards. Recuva also recovers the files in their own name, which makes your suggestion redundant (in XP). Perhaps there needs to be more tests in Vista/7.


This is all in normal scan. Deep scan might be different, but I haven't the time to experiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.