allen2

Of course, that could be a solution but i don't like modifying system files as this will break sfc and most likely some usefull dism commands. The annoying popup have dispeared since i disabled windows update service and some windows update tasks.

It seems they also though it was usefull to get sometimes that popup stating that nonsence even when not using windows update or patching. I'm planning to use dism to update even if i have to do this offline. But i'll have to find a way to disable this anoying popup.

OK Microsoft was more stupid than i though, in fact they locked the entire windows update service so people (including me) won't be able to manually install patchs. Dism method (https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/askcore/2011/02/15/how-to-use-dism-to-install-a-hotfix-from-within-windows/) seems to still work.

Once again Microsoft is trying to force people to upgrade. And again i don't see the technical background/issue that motivated that decision. I personnly think that it's a pretty stupid idea and strategy. I don't think people will upgrade to windows 10 just because patchs don't install automatically through windows updates. I suppose patchs will still be available through windows catalog or other ways.

The Sdelete finished and failed to properly clean the drive and i think the reason is because that the files that i can still see/recover are outside the partition. So i dropped the format method and i'm currently using dban from a vm within windows using passthrough access to the hard drive (not to the partition/volume). It should take 7h for the same 3TB drive. Just to let you know, the dban method with a VM was successfull.

Thanks for your answer. I suppose that the quick format before launching bitlocker encryption is the reason why it "failed" to properly erase the data but then why bitlocker is taking such a long time (took more than 6h for 3TB) ? As i wanted to use a native tool i tried what was the nearest : sysinternals sdelete and it is still running. I didn't want to reboot my computer (i don't have a test computer anymore) to wipe my drives (not the system ones) and the ATA secure erase need reboot as i understood. I was looking for a native MS tool that would do the job. Perhaps format (without /q) will be enough but it will leave the at least the MBR. Also i supposed wrongly that security improved (as bitlocker was available natively) and that MS would have provided a proper way to wipe a hard drive. Also i supposed that if such tool existed it would be faster than other not native tools except ATA secure erase. The reboot.pro thread is interesting but a litlle old and that why i had discarded it when i googled hdd wiping. But it seems nothing changed in the last 5 years.

I'm looking for a fast (and efficient) method to wipe some hdd from within windows (8.1). I'm aware that it isn't the best option as i could use DBAN that would do a good job. I tried the windows method : - deleting partitions and mbr - recreating a partition - create a bitlocker volume and choose a full disk encryption - let windows encrypt the full disk - delete the partition - check if something is recoverable and most files were recoverable. So obviously MS bitlocker didn't do what it should have. So if someone know a reliable and fast method to do the job with preferably only windows tools, i would greatly appreciate. Of course i did a search (google and also here) and found out that there are third party tools that could do the job but i would like to avoid those.

Most likely the moderator of lemonde.fr and related websites were tired of moderating too much. I don't think it is the right place to discuss political matter. Also most likely the french government isn't involved in any way in the moderation of the comments of lemonde.fr as it is owned by a private group. I suppose they had to reduce the number of moderators to reduce the costs as usual and perhaps they banned IP from foreign countries.

Unless you need w3svc for web hosting, you should disable this service. Or at least filter it with the firewall.

From what i remember, at least in the older trial versions (i didn't try it recently), the trial wasn't limited by a number of host. Another tool (the trial is said to be only limited in time): https://www.paessler.com/info/ping_utility Or the freeware: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/multiple_ping_tool.html There are so much tools (free or not) that are already do what is needed to the OP that i don't think he wanted to learn how to script/program the functionnality. Also Jaclaz your code isn't multi threaded and for example with a lot of IP (about 40 as the OP stated) , it might ping only one every 40 seconds. Then it wouldn't be an effective monitoring. It would be very complex to do a multi-threaded batch to properly ping and report the result for a lot of IPs as in batch you can't make a child process speak to his father.

Or use an already made monitoring program created for this for example Ipswitch whatsup gold: https://www.ipswitch.com/application-and-network-monitoring/whatsup-gold

Beside the real challenge of having really clever progress bar (a progress bar should be based on the time needed to do the whole process but in most cases you can't predict it accurately) , i'll add that doing this kind of thing (progress bar) with autoit could be perhaps easier for a newbie.

You should look at this code project page : http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/20431/A-Small-DHCP-Server-Using-UDP-With-Asynchronous-Ca

Applocker seems to be the best defense but it isn't available for most versions of windows 7 (only enterprise or ultimate are supported: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd759117(v=ws.11).aspx ).

Usually you should avoid using those kind of software as most functions included could be easily handled by hand but some people prefer relying on this kind of software to do it in thier place (but i can't understand why as i hate not knowing exactly what a software do).

Both servers seem to be used for the same purpose: the dns alias ie9comview.vo.msecnd.net is shown for both of them when you do a nslookup. So as you disabled the check on IE side, both should not be contacted anymore.

It seems possible: https://community.landesk.com/docs/DOC-27736 I didn't try it myself.

Powershell is object based (a good thing). Microsoft promoted it as the future language that would replace batch and vbs. But it is extremely slow (slower than vbs and batch), it can't really work without wmi call (for a lot system related action) and buggy (write-host "hello world" > file won't be written to file). It also has drawback of its nature (object based language): most value needs to be extracted from the object to be used (or exported to text) but they will be printed on the screen just fine. So for people knowing many other scriptings language (or even compiled language), why using powershell unless it is really easier/faster/cleaner to create the needed script/program ?

The real good new is that it should be a native port of bash not an emulated version of bash like cygwin. As i used both cygwin or (unixtools) to script on windows servers, i can tell that it could improve a lot scripting on windows. Anyway as it is MS they may still render it useless just like they did with powershell.

The decrease in interesst and use could also comme from the fact the free upgrade is very limited: - you can't change any material part of your computer. If you do, you lose activation and when you call Microsoft activation services, they'll tell you that you need to restore your old os then upgrade again unless you want to pay for a retail win 10 license. - the uac is extremely anoying and MS force the users to let it enabled as you won't be able to launch metro apps if you disable it and even calc became a metro apps in win 10. It looks like to me that they are just trying to force people to buy win 10 license eventhough they are still offering the free upgrade.

From the log files, it could be coming from your system user32.dll and ms visual c++ runtime 10 also seems missing. Perhaps you could post your user32.dll version and date and install the c++ runtime.

Thanks, Victoria 4.3 seems perfect for the job. I'll try a full erase and report here the results. In the end whenever i try to access with Victoria (i suppose that any tool will have the same problem) to the LBA between 2183266048 and 2224268463 the disk disappear.

Hi, It was a long time since i posted there (i had a lot of stuff to do IRL). I have a ST32000542AS that was in raid 5 array. I removed it from the raid 5 array as it was "stopping to work" until next reboot. I connected it to a intel sata II controller (Z77) and tried a long check (surface scan i think) with sea tools for windows which failed at 53%. Seatools for windows added in the diagnostics logs that seatools for dos could repair the drive so it tried it and it failed a 54%. I was also able to upgrade the firmware from CC34 to CC35. As the drive isn't under warranty, i would like to try anything that might force sector reallocation or mark the unusable sectors as bad. When seatools (dos or windows) fail its scan/repair (low level format ?), the drive disappear completly (but it continue to spin as usual) until next reboot (for seatools dos) or until i unplug / replug it (seatools for windows). Below are the smart values taken from Crystal disk info: ID Cur Wor Thr RawValues(6) Attribute Name01 117 100 __6 000008ECD67C Read Error Rate03 100 100 __0 000000000000 Spin-Up Time04 100 100 _20 000000000109 Start/Stop Count05 __5 __5 _36 000000000F37 Reallocated Sectors Count07 _69 _60 _30 00000072A1B6 Seek Error Rate09 100 100 __0 00000000016B Power-On Hours0A 100 100 _97 000000000000 Spin Retry Count0C 100 100 _20 000000000108 Power Cycle CountB7 100 100 __0 000000000000 UnknownB8 100 100 _99 000000000000 End-to-End ErrorBB _96 _96 __0 000000000004 Reported Uncorrectable ErrorsBC 100 _96 __0 00080008000B Command TimeoutBD _97 _97 __0 000000000003 High Fly WritesBE _57 _45 _45 00002B2B002B Airflow TemperatureC2 _43 _55 __0 00140000002B TemperatureC3 _53 _33 __0 000008ECD67C Hardware ECC recoveredC5 100 100 __0 000000000000 Current Pending Sector CountC6 100 100 __0 000000000000 Uncorrectable Sector CountC7 200 200 __0 000000000000 UltraDMA CRC Error CountF0 100 253 __0 FB53000003EE Head Flying HoursF1 100 253 __0 0000BA881646 Total LBAs WrittenF2 100 253 __0 00002B092FE4 Total LBAs ReadThanks by advance for suggestions.

The cache on the raid controller is primarily used (needed) for performance. The cache is storing the data before being written to the drives. The battery is needed in case of power outage to keep the data stored in the cache until power is restored. Some controllers need a bbu to enable some functionalities like write cache. So in some cases, a working bbu is required to allow maximum performance even if there is no need of it (an ups should be used to avoid power outage and then the bbu shouldn't be needed for its primary role).

I hope this will answer your question.