• FYI: Encrypting File System for FAT32

    From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to All on Sat Nov 11 22:43:21 2023
    I used a SD card as drive D: on a Win10 Netbook and wanted
    to replace it by a bigger one. Because it was FAT32 formatted,
    there shouldn't be any problem to just copy all files from
    the old to the new SD card. I put both cards in a USB
    card reader, connected the reader to an Win11 PC and used
    Explorer to copy all files to the new card. But there
    was a problem with three system folders: WindowsApps, WpSystem
    and WUDownloadCache. Even rebooting to Save Mode didn't
    solve the problem. There was no access to the files in
    these folders, even though FAT32 doesn't support any access
    restriction features.


    With the help of Google I found this:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10726147B2/en

    || First, starting from Windows 10 “Redstone 1”, EFS-based
    || encryption is supported for FAT volumes. This feature is
    || thoroughly described in US10726147B2.
    ||
    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3
    || directory entries store additional metadata. In the current
    || implementation, this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used
    || as flags and four bits are used to store the padding size.

    I then connected the USB reader to a Win7 PC and it wasn't
    any problem to copy the three folders. But because the misused
    bits in the directory are not copied (Win7 doesn't know about
    them), the files in the folders are now normal files and no longer
    recognized by Win10/11 as encrypted files and therefore useless.

    So, if you have a FAT formatted USB pen drive or SD card
    with some files or folders you can't delete, then they are
    maybe encrypted and Windows doesn't allow any access to them.
    Just connect them to a Win7 PC and you can delete them
    without any problem.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E. R.@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 00:15:39 2023
    On 2023-11-11 22:43, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    I used a SD card as drive D: on a Win10 Netbook and wanted
    to replace it by a bigger one. Because it was FAT32 formatted,
    there shouldn't be any problem to just copy all files from
    the old to the new SD card. I put both cards in a USB
    card reader, connected the reader to an Win11 PC and used
    Explorer to copy all files to the new card. But there
    was a problem with three system folders: WindowsApps, WpSystem
    and WUDownloadCache. Even rebooting to Save Mode didn't
    solve the problem. There was no access to the files in
    these folders, even though FAT32 doesn't support any access
    restriction features.


    With the help of Google I found this:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10726147B2/en

    || First, starting from Windows 10 “Redstone 1”, EFS-based
    || encryption is supported for FAT volumes. This feature is
    || thoroughly described in US10726147B2.
    ||
    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3
    || directory entries store additional metadata. In the current
    || implementation, this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used
    || as flags and four bits are used to store the padding size.

    I then connected the USB reader to a Win7 PC and it wasn't
    any problem to copy the three folders. But because the misused
    bits in the directory are not copied (Win7 doesn't know about
    them), the files in the folders are now normal files and no longer
    recognized by Win10/11 as encrypted files and therefore useless.

    So, if you have a FAT formatted USB pen drive or SD card
    with some files or folders you can't delete, then they are
    maybe encrypted and Windows doesn't allow any access to them.
    Just connect them to a Win7 PC and you can delete them
    without any problem.

    Interesting, thanks.

    --
    Cheers,
    Carlos E.R.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hello World@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sat Nov 11 23:16:00 2023
    On 11/11/2023 21:43, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:

    So, if you have a FAT formatted USB pen drive or SD card
    with some files or folders you can't delete, then they are
    maybe encrypted and Windows doesn't allow any access to them.
    Just connect them to a Win7 PC and you can delete them
    without any problem.

    What if people don't have Win7 PC? Do they just sit tight and shake their cock to pass time?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 01:14:30 2023
    On 11/11/2023 4:43 PM, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    I used a SD card as drive D: on a Win10 Netbook and wanted
    to replace it by a bigger one. Because it was FAT32 formatted,
    there shouldn't be any problem to just copy all files from
    the old to the new SD card. I put both cards in a USB
    card reader, connected the reader to an Win11 PC and used
    Explorer to copy all files to the new card. But there
    was a problem with three system folders: WindowsApps, WpSystem
    and WUDownloadCache. Even rebooting to Save Mode didn't
    solve the problem. There was no access to the files in
    these folders, even though FAT32 doesn't support any access
    restriction features.


    With the help of Google I found this:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10726147B2/en

    || First, starting from Windows 10 “Redstone 1”, EFS-based
    || encryption is supported for FAT volumes. This feature is
    || thoroughly described in US10726147B2.
    ||
    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3
    || directory entries store additional metadata. In the current
    || implementation, this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used
    || as flags and four bits are used to store the padding size.

    I then connected the USB reader to a Win7 PC and it wasn't
    any problem to copy the three folders. But because the misused
    bits in the directory are not copied (Win7 doesn't know about
    them), the files in the folders are now normal files and no longer
    recognized by Win10/11 as encrypted files and therefore useless.

    So, if you have a FAT formatted USB pen drive or SD card
    with some files or folders you can't delete, then they are
    maybe encrypted and Windows doesn't allow any access to them.
    Just connect them to a Win7 PC and you can delete them
    without any problem.

    Somewhere in this claim, there has got to be an interpretation error.
    The evidence does not add up, of miraculous behavior. For example,
    what is a "WUDownloadCache" doing on a FAT stick ? Do you mean ExFAT ?
    Do you mean NTFS ?

    Encryption does not necessarily prevent access. Access is controlled
    with ACLs or similar. When a file is encrypted, if you do not use
    the correct protocol for examination, the file will look like
    "binary random numbers". That is the consequence of encryption.
    If I encrypt my ransom note, and the police use a hex editor,
    they can find no mention of "small denomination notes", because
    the file is binary garbage to them.

    To copy a file for example, I can use "dd", "seek", "skip" and
    transfer blocks of data representing the file. If encryption is
    involved, when I look at the resulting data now stored on some
    other storage device, it will be binary garbage.

    The metadata in the file system, may indicate "hey, pal, this
    file is encrypted". The OS and its File Explorer or similar.
    can then parse the file and tell you "if you present a password,
    we can unlock this for you and present plaintext". An encrypted
    file does not necessarily have metadata at the file blocks level,
    indicating the encryption method. Perhaps only the metadata
    indicates it is encrypted. Certain kinds of archives, they
    can have plaintext indicating encryption is present as metadata
    within the item. An MSOffice document, may indicate a password is
    required.

    At the file system level, if a file system supports ownership,
    attributes, ACLs, then access (at the file system level) can be
    blocked. Not all file systems have support for that. That's what
    suggests to me, your determination of what happened, is a bit
    flawed.

    Start by opening Disk Management. That's the easiest thing.
    Does it really say "FAT32" ???

    Alternately, use "diskpart.exe" like this.

    (Admin window)
    diskpart
    list disk
    select disk 2 # assumes this is the USB stick
    list partition
    select partition 3 # assumes this is the affected partition
    detail partition # This gives info on what file system is present
    exit

    Not all file systems have nice dumper utilities for giving
    additional information. Bitlocker has a utility for indicating
    the Bitlockered status of storage devices. And perhaps, even on
    a version of OS that does not "support" the creation of new
    Bitlocker volumes, there may still be a "manage-bde -status" available.

    Another utility is "fsutil". Unfortunately, it is not an orthogonal
    utility and does not support all Windows file systems.

    fsutil fsinfo # You can see some things are missing

    If NTFS was involved for example, you can do this (read info from a second boot OS):

    fsutil usn readdata Y:\Windows\Logs\CBS\CBS.log

    The result you get from that, can be decoded with this table:

    Constants - the following attribute values are returned by the GetFileAttributes function:

    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_READONLY = 1 (0x1)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_HIDDEN = 2 (0x2)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_SYSTEM = 4 (0x4)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_DIRECTORY = 16 (0x10)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_ARCHIVE = 32 (0x20)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL = 128 (0x80)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_TEMPORARY = 256 (0x100)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_SPARSE_FILE = 512 (0x200)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_REPARSE_POINT = 1024 (0x400)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_COMPRESSED = 2048 (0x800) <=== old compression... new compression uses reparse point
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_OFFLINE = 4096 (0x1000)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NOT_CONTENT_INDEXED = 8192 (0x2000)
    FILE_ATTRIBUTE_ENCRYPTED = 16384 (0x4000) <=== is this EFS ???

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to Paul on Sun Nov 12 09:49:17 2023
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:

    Explorer to copy all files to the new card. But there
    was a problem with three system folders: WindowsApps, WpSystem
    and WUDownloadCache. Even rebooting to Save Mode didn't
    solve the problem. There was no access to the files in
    these folders, even though FAT32 doesn't support any access
    restriction features.


    With the help of Google I found this:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/
    https://patents.google.com/patent/US10726147B2/en

    || First, starting from Windows 10 “Redstone 1”, EFS-based
    || encryption is supported for FAT volumes. This feature is
    || thoroughly described in US10726147B2.
    ||
    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3
    || directory entries store additional metadata. In the current
    || implementation, this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used
    || as flags and four bits are used to store the padding size.


    Somewhere in this claim, there has got to be an interpretation error.
    The evidence does not add up, of miraculous behavior. For example,
    what is a "WUDownloadCache" doing on a FAT stick ? Do you mean ExFAT ?
    Do you mean NTFS ?


    My netbook only has a 32G C: drive, which isn't nearly enough
    for Win10 itself. Therefore I use a SD card in the build-in
    SD card reader as drive D: for programs and user data. The
    card is FAT32 formatted to avoid any access restriction problems
    when duplicating the card. If possible I use portable programs which
    doesn't need to be installed but only copied to the SD card or at
    least programs, where I can specify an installation folder on
    drive d:. A SD card isn't made for so many write cycles when used
    as a SSD replacement, so after about 2 years the spare blocks are used
    up and the SD card switches to read-only mode. Then I just copy
    all files on the card to a new one (on a different PC) and
    because of FAT32 there wasn't any problem. Then I insert the new
    card in the netbook and all is OK for the next 2 years.

    But now Whatsapp can only be installed from the MS Store. The
    only way to specify where it should be installed is in the
    Windows settings (drive to install new apps). When you
    install an app from the MS Store, the 3 folder given above
    are created.



    Encryption does not necessarily prevent access. Access is controlled
    with ACLs or similar.

    That's what I also thought. But Win10/11 has a different opinion.


    To copy a file for example, I can use "dd", "seek", "skip" and
    transfer blocks of data representing the file. If encryption is
    involved, when I look at the resulting data now stored on some
    other storage device, it will be binary garbage.

    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    If you want to copy the files in Win10/11, you need a
    program which accesses the card at block level with
    it's own FAT32 driver, because when the Windows FAT32
    driver is involved, you are lost.

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E. R.@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 12:51:25 2023
    On 2023-11-12 09:49, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:

    ...

    Somewhere in this claim, there has got to be an interpretation error.
    The evidence does not add up, of miraculous behavior. For example,
    what is a "WUDownloadCache" doing on a FAT stick ? Do you mean ExFAT ?
    Do you mean NTFS ?


    My netbook only has a 32G C: drive, which isn't nearly enough
    for Win10 itself. Therefore I use a SD card in the build-in
    SD card reader as drive D: for programs and user data. The
    card is FAT32 formatted to avoid any access restriction problems
    when duplicating the card. If possible I use portable programs which
    doesn't need to be installed but only copied to the SD card or at
    least programs, where I can specify an installation folder on
    drive d:. A SD card isn't made for so many write cycles when used
    as a SSD replacement, so after about 2 years the spare blocks are used
    up and  the SD card switches to read-only mode. Then I just copy
    all files on the card to a new one (on a different PC) and
    because of FAT32 there wasn't any problem. Then I insert the new
    card in the netbook and all is OK for the next 2 years.

    But now Whatsapp can only be installed from the MS Store. The
    only way to specify where it should be installed is in the
    Windows settings (drive to install new apps). When you
    install an app from the MS Store, the 3 folder given above
    are created.



    Encryption does not necessarily prevent access. Access is controlled
    with ACLs or similar.

    That's what I also thought. But Win10/11 has a different opinion.


    To copy a file for example, I can use "dd", "seek", "skip" and
    transfer blocks of data representing the file. If encryption is
    involved, when I look at the resulting data now stored on some
    other storage device, it will be binary garbage.

    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    You can instead clone the card. Image it.


    If you want to copy the files in Win10/11, you need a
    program which accesses the card at block level with
    it's own FAT32 driver, because when the Windows FAT32
    driver is involved, you are lost.

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.

    It sounds very strange to me to hear there were unused bits in the FAT directory entries. The original FAT definition was very compact, no
    unused space. Now, in the structure for long names that was added later, perhaps.

    I don't have my msdos technical book for verification, though.

    --
    Cheers,
    Carlos E.R.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E. R.@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 14:10:33 2023
    On 2023-11-12 13:20, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 12:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    It sounds very strange to me to hear there were unused bits in the FAT
    directory entries. The original FAT definition was very compact, no
    unused space. Now, in the structure for long names that was added later,
    perhaps.

    I don't have my msdos technical book for verification, though.


    It is explaind in the link I provided:

    https://k2s.cc/file/f93029041094d/gl_644.mp4

    A video?

    I prefer a document.


    --
    Cheers,
    Carlos E.R.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to Carlos E. R. on Sun Nov 12 13:20:35 2023
    On 12.11.2023 12:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    It sounds very strange to me to hear there were unused bits in the FAT directory entries. The original FAT definition was very compact, no
    unused space. Now, in the structure for long names that was added later, perhaps.

    I don't have my msdos technical book for verification, though.


    It is explaind in the link I provided:

    https://k2s.cc/file/f93029041094d/gl_644.mp4


    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3 directory
    || entries store additional metadata. In the current implementation,
    || this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used as flags and four bits
    || are used to store the padding size.
    ||
    || The additional metadata is stored in the NTByte field, which is
    || located at the offset of 12 bytes within the 8.3 directory entry.
    || Previously, this field was only used to store two flags marking the
    || short base name or extension as lowercase (bits #3 and #4 respectively).
    ||
    || Now, remaining bits are used too. Bit #0 is set when the file is
    || encrypted (it’s also set for a directory when its newly created
    || files should be encrypted by default), bit #1 is set when the file
    || starts with a large EFS header (otherwise, it’s a standard EFS
    || header). Other bits (bits #2, #5, #6, and #7) are used to store
    || the padding size (which is at most 15 bytes in size, so 4 bits are
    || enough) – its bit #0 (LSB) goes to bit #2 of the NTByte field,
    || bit #1 to bit #5, bit #2 to bit #6, bit #3 to bit #7.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to Carlos E. R. on Sun Nov 12 14:39:15 2023
    On 12.11.2023 14:10, Carlos E. R. wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 13:20, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 12:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    It sounds very strange to me to hear there were unused bits in the FAT
    directory entries. The original FAT definition was very compact, no
    unused space. Now, in the structure for long names that was added later, >>> perhaps.

    I don't have my msdos technical book for verification, though.


    It is explaind in the link I provided:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Slootweg@21:1/5 to Carlos E. R. on Sun Nov 12 13:42:05 2023
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 09:49, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:
    [...]
    My netbook only has a 32G C: drive, which isn't nearly enough
    for Win10 itself. Therefore I use a SD card in the build-in
    SD card reader as drive D: for programs and user data. The
    card is FAT32 formatted to avoid any access restriction problems
    when duplicating the card. If possible I use portable programs which doesn't need to be installed but only copied to the SD card or at
    least programs, where I can specify an installation folder on
    drive d:. A SD card isn't made for so many write cycles when used
    as a SSD replacement, so after about 2 years the spare blocks are used
    up and the SD card switches to read-only mode. Then I just copy
    all files on the card to a new one (on a different PC) and
    because of FAT32 there wasn't any problem. Then I insert the new
    card in the netbook and all is OK for the next 2 years.

    But now Whatsapp can only be installed from the MS Store. The
    only way to specify where it should be installed is in the
    Windows settings (drive to install new apps). When you
    install an app from the MS Store, the 3 folder given above
    are created.

    Encryption does not necessarily prevent access. Access is controlled
    with ACLs or similar.

    That's what I also thought. But Win10/11 has a different opinion.
    [...]
    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    You can instead clone the card. Image it.

    Good point! I just checked in Macrium Reflect Free and indeed my exFAT
    USB memory-stick (should be the same for Herbert's SD card) is listed as available for imaging and cloning.

    Perhaps Macrium Reflect is a little over the top for such a limited
    storage system, but probably another imaging/cloning problem, even an
    offline one, can do the job. (Macrium Reflect's Resue media could do it,
    but that still requires a temporary install of Micrium Reflect.)

    If you want to copy the files in Win10/11, you need a
    program which accesses the card at block level with
    it's own FAT32 driver, because when the Windows FAT32
    driver is involved, you are lost.

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.
    [...]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to Frank Slootweg on Sun Nov 12 15:06:17 2023
    On 12.11.2023 14:42, Frank Slootweg wrote:

    You can instead clone the card. Image it.

    Good point! I just checked in Macrium Reflect Free and indeed my exFAT
    USB memory-stick (should be the same for Herbert's SD card) is listed as available for imaging and cloning.

    Perhaps Macrium Reflect is a little over the top for such a limited storage system, but probably another imaging/cloning problem, even an
    offline one, can do the job. (Macrium Reflect's Resue media could do it,
    but that still requires a temporary install of Micrium Reflect.)

    An easier solution was, to not copy the folders but
    reinstall Whatsapp. I just wanted to inform, that on
    a FAT32 formatted USB memory stick there can be files
    which you can't delete in Win10/11 but without any problem
    in Win7 and whats the reason for that. I hate OS which
    control me, I want to control the OS. I miss DOS6.2 and
    the real mode of the CPU.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E. R.@21:1/5 to Frank Slootweg on Sun Nov 12 15:12:25 2023
    On 2023-11-12 14:42, Frank Slootweg wrote:
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 09:49, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:
    [...]


    [...]
    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    You can instead clone the card. Image it.

    Good point! I just checked in Macrium Reflect Free and indeed my exFAT
    USB memory-stick (should be the same for Herbert's SD card) is listed as available for imaging and cloning.

    Perhaps Macrium Reflect is a little over the top for such a limited storage system, but probably another imaging/cloning problem, even an
    offline one, can do the job. (Macrium Reflect's Resue media could do it,
    but that still requires a temporary install of Micrium Reflect.)

    I was not thinking of a smart cloning software, but dumb cloning
    software. Smart software do smart things like skipping unused sectors.

    I would use "dd" in Linux, but I understand there is a Windows version.

    Dumb cloning software doesn't say "we support FAT". They just clone bit
    by bit. They don't care what they are cloning.

    This is important because I understand these bits are not supported by
    all Windows versions. A dumb clone doesn't care what the OS supports,
    they can clone anything.

    --
    Cheers,
    Carlos E.R.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Slootweg@21:1/5 to Carlos E. R. on Sun Nov 12 16:30:56 2023
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 14:42, Frank Slootweg wrote:
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 09:49, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:
    [...]


    [...]
    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    You can instead clone the card. Image it.

    Good point! I just checked in Macrium Reflect Free and indeed my exFAT USB memory-stick (should be the same for Herbert's SD card) is listed as available for imaging and cloning.

    Perhaps Macrium Reflect is a little over the top for such a limited storage system, but probably another imaging/cloning problem, even an offline one, can do the job. (Macrium Reflect's Resue media could do it, but that still requires a temporary install of Micrium Reflect.)

    I was not thinking of a smart cloning software, but dumb cloning
    software. Smart software do smart things like skipping unused sectors.

    I would use "dd" in Linux, but I understand there is a Windows version.

    Dumb cloning software doesn't say "we support FAT". They just clone bit
    by bit. They don't care what they are cloning.

    This is important because I understand these bits are not supported by
    all Windows versions. A dumb clone doesn't care what the OS supports,
    they can clone anything.

    Yes, I know/realize all that, but Macrium Reflect *can* "play dumb"
    and just copy every sector, you just have to tick the relevant option
    when starting the clone/image operation ("Peform a Forensic Sector Copy.
    This option will copy all sectors from the source disk, whether they are
    in use or not.").

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E. R.@21:1/5 to Frank Slootweg on Sun Nov 12 18:56:17 2023
    On 2023-11-12 17:30, Frank Slootweg wrote:
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 14:42, Frank Slootweg wrote:
    Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
    On 2023-11-12 09:49, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:
    [...]


    [...]


    Perhaps Macrium Reflect is a little over the top for such a limited
    storage system, but probably another imaging/cloning problem, even an
    offline one, can do the job. (Macrium Reflect's Resue media could do it, >>> but that still requires a temporary install of Micrium Reflect.)

    I was not thinking of a smart cloning software, but dumb cloning
    software. Smart software do smart things like skipping unused sectors.

    I would use "dd" in Linux, but I understand there is a Windows version.

    Dumb cloning software doesn't say "we support FAT". They just clone bit
    by bit. They don't care what they are cloning.

    This is important because I understand these bits are not supported by
    all Windows versions. A dumb clone doesn't care what the OS supports,
    they can clone anything.

    Yes, I know/realize all that, but Macrium Reflect *can* "play dumb"
    and just copy every sector, you just have to tick the relevant option
    when starting the clone/image operation ("Peform a Forensic Sector Copy.
    This option will copy all sectors from the source disk, whether they are
    in use or not.").

    Ok, then do remember to use that option :-)


    --
    Cheers,
    Carlos E.R.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 14:40:28 2023
    On 11/12/2023 3:49 AM, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 07:14, Paul wrote:

    Explorer to copy all files to the new card. But there
    was a problem with three system folders: WindowsApps, WpSystem
    and WUDownloadCache. Even rebooting to Save Mode didn't
    solve the problem. There was no access to the files in
    these folders, even though FAT32 doesn't support any access
    restriction features.


    With the help of Google I found this:

    https://dfir.ru/2021/12/08/things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fat/
    https://patents.google.com/patent/US10726147B2/en

    || First, starting from Windows 10 “Redstone 1”, EFS-based
    || encryption is supported for FAT volumes. This feature is
    || thoroughly described in US10726147B2.
    ||
    || Encrypted files have the “.PFILE” extension and their 8.3
    || directory entries store additional metadata. In the current
    || implementation, this metadata fits 6 bits: two bits are used
    || as flags and four bits are used to store the padding size.


    Somewhere in this claim, there has got to be an interpretation error.
    The evidence does not add up, of miraculous behavior. For example,
    what is a "WUDownloadCache" doing on a FAT stick ? Do you mean ExFAT ?
    Do you mean NTFS ?


    My netbook only has a 32G C: drive, which isn't nearly enough
    for Win10 itself. Therefore I use a SD card in the build-in
    SD card reader as drive D: for programs and user data. The
    card is FAT32 formatted to avoid any access restriction problems
    when duplicating the card. If possible I use portable programs which
    doesn't need to be installed but only copied to the SD card or at
    least programs, where I can specify an installation folder on
    drive d:. A SD card isn't made for so many write cycles when used
    as a SSD replacement, so after about 2 years the spare blocks are used
    up and  the SD card switches to read-only mode. Then I just copy
    all files on the card to a new one (on a different PC) and
    because of FAT32 there wasn't any problem. Then I insert the new
    card in the netbook and all is OK for the next 2 years.

    But now Whatsapp can only be installed from the MS Store. The
    only way to specify where it should be installed is in the
    Windows settings (drive to install new apps). When you
    install an app from the MS Store, the 3 folder given above
    are created.



    Encryption does not necessarily prevent access. Access is controlled
    with ACLs or similar.

    That's what I also thought. But Win10/11 has a different opinion.


    To copy a file for example, I can use "dd", "seek", "skip" and
    transfer blocks of data representing the file. If encryption is
    involved, when I look at the resulting data now stored on some
    other storage device, it will be binary garbage.

    You can copy the files on any system which is not Win10/11
    and supports FAT32. The copied file is binary identical, but
    the misused bits in the directory are not set, so back
    on a Win10/11 system, the copied files are not recognized
    as encrypted files but as normal files and therefore useless
    (then you will also see the extension .PFILE).

    If you want to copy the files in Win10/11, you need a
    program which accesses the card at block level with
    it's own FAT32 driver, because when the Windows FAT32
    driver is involved, you are lost.

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.


    I defined a New App storage space here, on my ~30GB E: Fat32
    partition. The software created some empty directories.

    [Picture]

    https://i.postimg.cc/J04LQD4G/now-app-storage-space-redirect-win10.gif

    The "WindowsApps" resists entry, which is abnormal for FAT32.

    But as for the interpretation of what property is doing that,
    there is nothing inside that folder.

    I zeroed the 30GB partition, formatted it FAT32 before starting.
    After numerous experiments, most of the partition remains zeroed.
    Only a tiny portion of the partition contains data, it looks like
    directory data for the prefunctory structure. There are no *giant gobs*
    of encrypted data present.

    Does this "New App" storage include Windows Update ???
    I'm installing a Cumulative Update Preview KB5031445 right
    now, and ProcMon notes *no* access to E: partition at all.
    The contents of E: are not changing. The "size" of E:
    at the moment (Properties) is 409,600 bytes.

    Summary: I cannot access "WindowsApps", but other than that,
    there is no encrypted content on E: to be seen. The failure
    to access, is abnormal for FAT32, I'll grant you that.

    If they're using a WOF, I don't see the point of that unless
    the container for it is stored on E: (to save space on C: ).
    I scanned E: offline for evidence of binary blobs, there are none.

    Presumably my inability to reproduce is because I'm not on a tablet.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herbert Kleebauer@21:1/5 to Paul on Sun Nov 12 21:43:59 2023
    On 12.11.2023 20:40, Paul wrote:

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.


    I defined a New App storage space here, on my ~30GB E: Fat32
    partition. The software created some empty directories.

    [Picture]

    https://i.postimg.cc/J04LQD4G/now-app-storage-space-redirect-win10.gif

    The "WindowsApps" resists entry, which is abnormal for FAT32.

    You can use an administrator CMD window to cd into the
    folder and do a "dir /s". But you can't copy, read or
    delete any of the encrypted files.

    For example:

    Verzeichnis von D:\WindowsApps\5319275A.WhatsAppDesktop_2.2342.8.0_x64__cv1g1gvanyjgm

    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> .
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> ..
    11.11.2023 16:40 31.971 AppxManifest.xml
    11.11.2023 16:40 250.037 AppxBlockMap.xml
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> AppxMetadata
    11.11.2023 16:40 12.035 AppxSignature.p7x
    11.11.2023 16:37 0 05DBE9EA-EF75-43DB-8A03-27898B59D1E9 11.11.2023 16:40 66.960 clrcompression.dll
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> Design
    11.11.2023 16:40 1.530.368 e_sqlite3.dll
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> GraphQL
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> Images
    11.11.2023 16:40 1.625.480 Microsoft.Graphics.Canvas.dll
    11.11.2023 16:40 281.472 Microsoft.Graphics.Canvas.winmd
    11.11.2023 16:40 2.598.272 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.Core.Direct.dll 11.11.2023 16:40 103.296 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.Core.Direct.winmd 11.11.2023 16:40 295.824 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.winmd
    11.11.2023 16:40 551.368 Microsoft.Web.WebView2.Core.dll
    11.11.2023 16:40 98.232 Microsoft.Web.WebView2.Core.winmd 11.11.2023 16:40 8.776.768 resources.pri
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> Sounds
    11.11.2023 16:40 3.481.600 Wail.dll
    11.11.2023 16:40 9.728 Wail.winmd
    11.11.2023 16:40 157.624 WebView2Loader.dll
    11.11.2023 16:37 <DIR> WhatsApp.Design
    11.11.2023 16:40 98.668.032 WhatsApp.dll
    11.11.2023 16:40 293.376 WhatsApp.exe
    11.11.2023 16:40 107.894 WhatsApp.xr.xml
    11.11.2023 16:40 9.710.592 WhatsAppNative.dll
    11.11.2023 16:40 115.712 WhatsAppNative.winmd
    11.11.2023 16:40 6.144 WindowsLegacyApi.winmd
    23 Datei(en), 128.772.785 Bytes


    But as for the interpretation of what property is doing that,
    there is nothing inside that folder.

    I zeroed the 30GB partition, formatted it FAT32 before starting.
    After numerous experiments, most of the partition remains zeroed.
    Only a tiny portion of the partition contains data, it looks like
    directory data for the prefunctory structure. There are no *giant gobs*
    of encrypted data present.

    Only apps installed from the MS Store are installed in
    "WindowsApps". As long as you don't install any app,
    nothing is in "WindowsApps". But even if you set App
    storage space back to c: you will have a problems
    to remove the folder "WindowsApps" from e: (beside
    formatting e: or booting a Linux life system to
    delete the folder).


    Presumably my inability to reproduce is because I'm not on a tablet.

    That has nothing to do with a tablet. It is Win10/11
    which doesn't allow access to files with a formerly
    unused bit set in the FAT directory. Therefore I
    suggested to use a USB pen drive, which you can
    transfer to a non Win10/11 system to see whats really
    on the drive.

    Maybe also a Win7 running in a virtual machine on a
    Win10/11 host can access the files (or maybe Win10/11
    also restricts the access of the virtual machine).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to Herbert Kleebauer on Sun Nov 12 18:46:36 2023
    On 11/12/2023 3:43 PM, Herbert Kleebauer wrote:
    On 12.11.2023 20:40, Paul wrote:

    But you can easily test it yourself. Connect a FAT32
    (or exFAT) formatted USB pen drive, in Windows settings
    specify this drive as the drive where to install new apps
    and install an app from the MS Store. Then try to copy
    this 3 folders. And if you want to see whats really in
    this folders, connect the pen drive to a Win7 PC.


    I defined a New App storage space here, on my ~30GB E: Fat32
    partition. The software created some empty directories.

        [Picture]

         https://i.postimg.cc/J04LQD4G/now-app-storage-space-redirect-win10.gif

    The "WindowsApps" resists entry, which is abnormal for FAT32.

    You can use an administrator CMD window to cd into the
    folder and do a "dir /s". But you can't copy, read or
    delete any of the encrypted files.

    For example:

     Verzeichnis von D:\WindowsApps\5319275A.WhatsAppDesktop_2.2342.8.0_x64__cv1g1gvanyjgm

    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          .
    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          ..
    11.11.2023  16:40            31.971 AppxManifest.xml
    11.11.2023  16:40           250.037 AppxBlockMap.xml
    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          AppxMetadata
    11.11.2023  16:40            12.035 AppxSignature.p7x 11.11.2023  16:37                 0 05DBE9EA-EF75-43DB-8A03-27898B59D1E9
    11.11.2023  16:40            66.960 clrcompression.dll 11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          Design
    11.11.2023  16:40         1.530.368 e_sqlite3.dll
    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          GraphQL
    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          Images
    11.11.2023  16:40         1.625.480 Microsoft.Graphics.Canvas.dll 11.11.2023  16:40           281.472 Microsoft.Graphics.Canvas.winmd
    11.11.2023  16:40         2.598.272 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.Core.Direct.dll
    11.11.2023  16:40           103.296 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.Core.Direct.winmd
    11.11.2023  16:40           295.824 Microsoft.UI.Xaml.winmd 11.11.2023  16:40           551.368 Microsoft.Web.WebView2.Core.dll
    11.11.2023  16:40            98.232 Microsoft.Web.WebView2.Core.winmd
    11.11.2023  16:40         8.776.768 resources.pri
    11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          Sounds
    11.11.2023  16:40         3.481.600 Wail.dll
    11.11.2023  16:40             9.728 Wail.winmd
    11.11.2023  16:40           157.624 WebView2Loader.dll 11.11.2023  16:37    <DIR>          WhatsApp.Design
    11.11.2023  16:40        98.668.032 WhatsApp.dll
    11.11.2023  16:40           293.376 WhatsApp.exe
    11.11.2023  16:40           107.894 WhatsApp.xr.xml
    11.11.2023  16:40         9.710.592 WhatsAppNative.dll
    11.11.2023  16:40           115.712 WhatsAppNative.winmd 11.11.2023  16:40             6.144 WindowsLegacyApi.winmd               23 Datei(en),    128.772.785 Bytes


    But as for the interpretation of what property is doing that,
    there is nothing inside that folder.

    I zeroed the 30GB partition, formatted it FAT32 before starting.
    After numerous experiments, most of the partition remains zeroed.
    Only a tiny portion of the partition contains data, it looks like
    directory data for the prefunctory structure. There are no *giant gobs*
    of encrypted data present.

    Only apps installed from the MS Store are installed in
    "WindowsApps". As long as you don't install any app,
    nothing is in "WindowsApps". But even if you set App
    storage space back to c: you will have a problems
    to remove the folder "WindowsApps" from e: (beside
    formatting e: or booting a Linux life system to
    delete the folder).


              Presumably my inability to reproduce is because I'm not on a tablet.

    That has nothing to do with a tablet. It is Win10/11
    which doesn't allow access to files with a formerly
    unused bit set in the FAT directory. Therefore I
    suggested to use a USB pen drive, which you can
    transfer to a non Win10/11 system to see whats really
    on the drive.

    Maybe also a Win7 running in a virtual machine on a
    Win10/11 host can access the files (or maybe Win10/11
    also restricts the access of the virtual machine).

    I installed Ubuntu 2204 WSL, and WhatsApp. I ran WhatsApp
    but bailed out at the point it wanted to pair with a smartphone.
    Ubuntu 2204 WSL is now fully functional, and a Firefox window
    opens in it.

    Absolute none of these, would write a drop of data onto E:
    Even though the original change of storage location to E:
    created a few directory entries. Including the WindowsApps
    that would not open.

    But if I use a hex editor, and look in the volume to
    see *some* data chunks written, there is nothing. Nothing
    is *using* E: for new App storage. I did go to the Microsoft Store,
    and I installed more than one thing and ran it. I used the
    Microsoft Store to install Thunderbird 115 MSIX version, ran it,
    imported a profile from a "normal" version of Thunderbird, and
    read some articles.

    I did try a few things. No dice.

    This is normal for Microsoft.

    I just like to do full simulations if I can, before I start
    dipping into details.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)