X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 288F3395CC9C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1592926119;
	bh=yYmJ3x6s/pvbxzOxQl7sG7GMXE13OIAaSgWe7OTzpIA=;
	h=To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:
	 From;
	b=YKHgVuHH6o23Mu6Ix2VulHNV9Ye+RrGf88mLECEI1TTHSeGOTJLDaUvoqzajuoCbh
	 1aMQnygEoehxNg3XwI4XAWng4fA9pOU0UrQT06mmMGxvMZGt+NS+eSCZcG0D1J2S+D
	 /6XsbVQlDFOw8oi66aJUThi3g5FPI6nNc0VyyWP8=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org D397D393C8B3
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none;
 b=BNW7yPYtPuzdIouSngNTGWqeuPTaLEzqa1z19SB0KZ+jiiuM0EmRwMrfFL4dFpkV1wQyxAxF6kFskDKdji9eOIFZcIjGfQYXJJoQgvahSzf+m3aonU6//hBpd8Ym5IVhQITyfyIcZmGun1tzPcfgiy27h5qXGV6qETVzP9iqtntf+Zd1eE/eD6a1p16GyWyItCpjMuNJF9vYrKBUyxX15ahtJlOwc8CbwRaHnMp2TbPP1xCSgHC7jTwRgFqazIGC3E6V/hNuXqIfd2ASRmEgV2guLpYdKbWnLeyhrEWEhbXMSn80sGtRDueohPJf/ytHV+8e/5fvPX/bmtQjz5MyeQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; 
 s=arcselector9901;
 h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;
 bh=iM5u76A8ju7k/yXJvgBSq1lUj9hYx27HfSpykMbiRPk=;
 b=RCYz8k6hAkGns7ph7bArOjqHejknDPRggPL0mzYQeN1yTdYrYgSR53FB7LiPrm1yo3RacIP2N3PcF1wFZwkqXY3md7lLhRWgTBOGC66PiIlj9Gyv7CFuSz7uSbYwb0L7EtRAxjFuG+HF6g9i8SV/fuTmRcTVgB0SC80vyguNYF7AJL3gsn8xrdTxvZOVn1OJ4TvJEsi5YH4cr5TmeKu4RAJ1f/H2HVpQqsONOjh4H49X+lL1szJtgP1VHn4mZY6YA8rN1YksIbCBsYLOpfr1Ig48Oo4h4u6DauzrfXZ4DqmP9R+9Gq3g/20pqpIz2XXQdD/XjzxdQEcgF3IMJuIyWg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none;
 dkim=none; arc=none
To: cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: [cygwin] DD bug fails to wipe last 48 sectors of a disk
Thread-Topic: [cygwin] DD bug fails to wipe last 48 sectors of a disk
Thread-Index: AQHWRlgtCZZ0g6noFEKBC6QD7s7xqKjgYswAgAAb2ayAAXbVgIAEYnXD
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:28:31 +0000
Message-ID: <DB7PR01MB519396195ADB3E3E1217B22BD5940@DB7PR01MB5193.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
References: <DB7PR01MB5193A18F1D947ED4C276CD25D5980 AT DB7PR01MB5193 DOT eurprd01 DOT prod DOT exchangelabs DOT com>
 <1d1801d64677$bea56050$3bf020f0$@pdinc.us>
 <DB7PR01MB5193CC1C7630FB13B81B9DBAD5980 AT DB7PR01MB5193 DOT eurprd01 DOT prod DOT exchangelabs DOT com>,
 <60bf1507-4edb-a03f-ec14-07e1ab7f0d94 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <60bf1507-4edb-a03f-ec14-07e1ab7f0d94@cs.umass.edu>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:B07595AC2068CD7598B822D046F97F7F4B3CF5959D3AF64E09868D21B02C78BB;
 UpperCasedChecksum:A1FCDA2FB422844873D1DC8E9E99F000FEB57A0FDB629472C0D1D2D47A5163FB;
 SizeAsReceived:7104; Count:44
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [QNR1+SoEodhzWcNTajrN9aZQ6mGjGSB6]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 44
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 80c2f3e5-0b3a-4062-d726-08d8178a1614
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VE1EUR02HT105:
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: UTydhfY3+h/V/WXIorsl6C2Y15e8w/h+wKzruMQ3uhggPOgQj9nYza9w6ybDEUO4DBTgSri59xcoCAHr9oo5vflpySm4t14ea+r9jFAFOSOgL1Q0r09iJ2iD6taOGEgyAik35HpG1Qk/QYVvz2+nPQ1CFNoq79j/OAiVesKAZb0pr8Np3iv18xZ6LfakjnJ2HX2aBe6doVRzJQx5A2y80/3nn/kzxMjBjl5T7Ut8myopnCjCV5j/Qfq8ph4jtTno
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:0; SRV:;
 IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DB7PR01MB5193.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com; PTR:;
 CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:; DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; 
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: JLJcnEHB7R8I+dV6JCte9sIbJLcSahywKDgJykp/iUgyyiNuwI2rBgyG6Nwh9NaLmKVN1BFngpE46xhoovHDAnHPZm9YzdyQKev018tkkRcZUKQ90pVgCCIVAt0C2bwIZMuU30+C2v/CxBzmHan/cg==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 80c2f3e5-0b3a-4062-d726-08d8178a1614
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Jun 2020 15:28:31.5246 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VE1EUR02HT105
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Hashim Aziz via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: Hashim Aziz <hashaziz AT hotmail DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces AT cygwin DOT com>

I hadn't checked with 512 byte block sizes because of the amount of time it would have taken, but sure enough have just finished trying with bs=512 and no block size at all (so dd's default block size, which is either 512 or 1024) and although each wipe took over 24 hours, they did indeed wipe all of the sectors. So it seems that there's a bug with regards to how Cygwin handles the last block when a large (i.e. sane) block size is selected, and that this bug doesn't occur on actual UNIX-based systems.

________________________________
From: Cygwin <cygwin-bounces AT cygwin DOT com> on behalf of Eliot Moss <moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
Sent: 20 June 2020 9:26 PM
To: The Cygwin Mailing List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: [cygwin] DD bug fails to wipe last 48 sectors of a disk

On 6/20/2020 1:31 PM, Hashim Aziz via Cygwin wrote:
> To reproduce simply run the following command on a drive (obviously, this will irreversibly wipe all data):
>
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdX bs=4M status=progress
>
> Both drives were attached via internal SATA (by way of a PCIE to SATA Host Bus Adapter).
>
> Cygwin was running in an elevated window as dd cannot run in Cygwin without administrator access, at least not on Windows 10 and not when dealing with raw disks. I was running Avast the first time I discovered this, and am currently running Windows Defender, so doubt that the AV is the cause of this.
>
> The hard drives are a Western Digital WD10PURX-64E5EY0 (Serial: WD-WCC4J6HX189U) and a Kingston SV200S3128G (Serial: 12BA315PKAWK).
>
> I just ran DD for Windows 0.6beta3 with variations of the following command:
>
> dd.exe if=/dev/zero of=\\.\PHYSICALDRIVEX --progress bs=4M
>
> ...and can confirm that the bug also manifests here, but in a slightly different way - irrespective of the disk or block size, it fails to wipe the last 176 sectors of the drive.

I was going to ask: even with block size 512 bytes?  But I guess you checked that ...

Regards - Eliot
--
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
--
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple