Are the new security measures excessive

BrianS said:

It was Macrium free that told me I couldnt restore W11 from a usb drive

View attachment 50835

Click to expand...

That quoted para meant that Windows cannot boot from USB-connected external HDD/SSD disks.
Windows can boot from USB-connected USB memory sticks.


It's up to you what you do and what tools you use but do bear on mind that system imaging is much more flexible than disk cloning.
- I have several recent & ancient images stored away on the same backup disk and I could restore whichever one I wanted.
- In practice, I'd expect to restore the last image or possibly the one before that.
- In practice, I weed out all but the final system image for each Windows 10 Version about a year after I upgrade to a new Version. I also have some Windows 7 & Windows XP system images.
- In practice, I make my images alternately on a pair of backup disks so I can cope with a backup disk & an OS disk failing at the same time.
If you rely on disk cloning, you can only have as many backups as you have disks.


All the best,
Denis

BrianS said:

IMHO thats way too nerdy. Think you could sell all that to a fee paying client who simply wants a simple system/apps back up method?

Click to expand...

No, it's the exact opposite of nerdy. Nerdy is when you have to ensure enough available free space on a separate partition or drive because else your image file won't be able to fit on the drive. My laptop has only one internal SSD. I have a whole bunch of 3.5 inch 7200rpm HDDs in external USB3 enclosures, but they are slow like molasses when compared to the NVMe SSD. I have a separate D: partition on my SSD, but there's usually not enough available free space on that one. So, being unable to choose a destination folder that is located on the C: partition itself is one of the main reasons why I don't use Macrium. If you try to do that with it, then it throws a nerdy error message because that's just how stupid the program factually is. I know I have said this probably more than a dozen times in other threads on here and elsewhere, and, as much as I hate to sound like a broken record when it comes to Macrium, it is what it is, and soon it will be no longer free to use, anyway so...

Another good reason why I prefer the method that I use is that the UI of the Rescue Media bootable ISO is waa-aaaa-aaaaaaay less nerdy than Macrium. It's all about keeping things as simple convenient as possible. Keeping a habit of storing ALL personal user files ALWAYS on a separate partition or drive is way too nerdy even for me so, some of my files are on my C: partition, sometimes only temporarily. For reasons that should be completely obvious, these types of files should never be included in the image file. As a result the easy ability to specify file/folder exclusions is a must have. With Macrium, the only way to achieve that ability is by editing the Windows registry. Just because I am a nerd who knows how to do that, doesn't also mean that I want to do that, as there already exists an alternative solution to this, the latter solution being the least nerdy by a mile or two (or three or four or five). If you still don't know which solution that might be, then take a wild guess. I could go on like this. But would it help? I told you in that other thread that I have patience. But I don't do bottomless pits. That's all part of me being a pragmatist, as opposed to just being a nerd or acting like one. Not trying to point any fingers here. You got the picture.

BrianS said:

A parallel system/apps clone of C: onto internal D: drive seems entirely sensible and simple. How long it takes to do the iso img isnt relevant as its only done occasionaly when a significant change is made (new app added etc)

Click to expand...

You are still confusing image create/restore strategies with cloning. Cloning uses no image file excepting only in situations where the cloned volume(s) is/are virtualized (like on a VM). Cloning causes the contents of one volume to be duplicated onto another volume, and the contents of the volume can be much more than just folders and files. Whereas the purpose of creating an image file─as for what we are discussing here─is to capture the contents of a volume into a file, and this file can be stored, just like any other file, on a volume that has a filesystem on it (e.g., the NTFS filesystem). Further, I already told you that the ISO file format is not intended for what we are discussing here. Other image file formats are.

BrianS said:

It can be tested by alternately manual startup booting up to C:/D: (I used to do this on a W7 m/c to go into Linux). To repeat personal data/work files I can manage myself and keep on an ext usb drive

What is wrong with this philosophy - pls dont get nerdy again its wasted on me

Click to expand...

What's wrong with it is that the test method that you describe does not let you detect all inconsistencies or errors that may result from cloning, even if these erros happen only very rarely. Just because you are capable to boot in Windows, use it to run your apps, go through various settings to see if they are still the same as they were before, etc. does not give you any guarantees beyond that which you are capable to see. I brought up the subject of real forensic tools like FTKImager only to make this clear. It's because, without delving into advanced subtopics like trusted methods for data verification and things like the use of MD5 hash codes in image verification type of strategies, it isn't a matter of whether people will pitfall. Rather, it is a matter of WHEN they will pitfall. Please do some of your own research instead of trying to blame me for getting nerdy. I have given you enough basic info to make it possible for you to start experimenting on your own, with my preferred method to create/restore image files. This isn't exactly rocket science, but I am here to help should you have any further questions.

@BrianS

I understand your frustrations and concerns about privacy, the complexities of account management, and the ever-increasing security measures.

You are correct that new EU regulations now require explicit consent for cookie usage by third parties. This is aimed at enhancing transparency and giving users more control over their data.

As for the enhanced verification processes such as Captcha, one-time pins, and repeated email verifications, they are primarily implemented for your safety. These measures help protect your account from unauthorized access, even though they may seem inconvenient at times.
The password management scenario you mentioned can indeed be challenging. Using a trusted password manager might help you safely store and manage your passwords.

With regards to Microsoft and Google, these tech giants do indeed wield substantial control over many aspects of our digital lives. However, most of their services are optional, and you can often find alternatives if you are uncomfortable with their practices.

Yes, Microsoft has several types of passwords and pins for different services. It may seem overwhelming, but it is part of the company's multi-layered approach to security. However, it is understandable that managing all these different passwords can be difficult and confusing.

As for Microsoft forcing you to sign up for an account on a new PC, this is mostly to integrate their services (like OneDrive, Office 365) for a seamless user experience. Remember, you can always use a local account on your Windows PC and limit Microsoft's access to your data.
You might also want to consider adjusting your privacy settings on your devices and accounts to minimize data gathering and promotional activities.