Bug #12696

Tails Installer rejects working USB drives, pretending they're not "removable"

Added by goupille 8 days ago. Updated 3 days ago.

Status:In ProgressStart date:06/14/2017
Priority:HighDue date:
Assignee:intrigeri% Done:

0%

Category:Installation
Target version:Tails_3.1
QA Check: Blueprint:
Feature Branch: Easy:
Type of work:Code Affected tool:Installer

Description

there are multiple reports about usb sticks working "flawlessly" before, or know as removable, that are now considered by tails installer as non removable.

a user gave us these links :

http://storaged.org/doc/udisks2-api/latest/gdbus-org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Drive.html#gdbus-property-org-freedesktop-UDisks2-Drive.MediaRemovable

and

http://storaged.org/doc/udisks2-api/latest/gdbus-org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Drive.html#gdbus-property-org-freedesktop-UDisks2-Drive.Removable

Tails installer seems to search for a "mediaremovable" flag instead of "removable" wrongly detect removable devices as non-removable.


Related issues

Related to Tails - Feature #10731: Tails Installer should not allow installing on non-removable USB sticks Resolved 12/09/2015
Duplicated by Tails - Bug #12697: tails-installer rejecting viable usb drives Duplicate 06/14/2017

Associated revisions

Revision f2be3a7c
Added by intrigeri 7 days ago

Document a workaround for installation/upgrade regression (refs: #12696).

History

#1 Updated by goupille 8 days ago

  • Related to Feature #10731: Tails Installer should not allow installing on non-removable USB sticks added

#2 Updated by intrigeri 8 days ago

  • Duplicated by Bug #12697: tails-installer rejecting viable usb drives added

#3 Updated by intrigeri 8 days ago

  • Category set to Installation
  • Status changed from New to Confirmed
  • Priority changed from Normal to Elevated
  • Target version set to Tails_3.1
  • Type of work changed from Research to Code
  • Affected tool set to Installer

This was also reported by a few people on reddit already, so it really seems we got something wrong. I want to fix that in Tails 3.1, and in Debian/Ubuntu ASAP. kurono, can you take care of the code part the end of June? If you can't, no big deal, I'll handle it.

#4 Updated by intrigeri 8 days ago

  • Subject changed from Tails-installer non-removable device check can be wrong to Tails Installer rejects working USB drives, pretending they're not "removable"

#5 Updated by intrigeri 7 days ago

  • Priority changed from Elevated to High

We're taking a lot of heat about this bug, so I'm documenting a workaround as we speak.

#6 Updated by intrigeri 7 days ago

intrigeri wrote:

We're taking a lot of heat about this bug, so I'm documenting a workaround as we speak.

Pushed: https://tails.boum.org/news/version_3.0/#known-issues

#7 Updated by intrigeri 7 days ago

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress

#8 Updated by kurono 7 days ago

  • Assignee changed from intrigeri to kurono

intrigeri wrote:

This was also reported by a few people on reddit already, so it really seems we got something wrong. I want to fix that in Tails 3.1, and in Debian/Ubuntu ASAP. kurono, can you take care of the code part the end of June? If you can't, no big deal, I'll handle it.

ahh sorry about this :(, I will take care!

#9 Updated by kurono 7 days ago

kurono wrote:

intrigeri wrote:

This was also reported by a few people on reddit already, so it really seems we got something wrong. I want to fix that in Tails 3.1, and in Debian/Ubuntu ASAP. kurono, can you take care of the code part the end of June? If you can't, no big deal, I'll handle it.

ahh sorry about this :(, I will take care!

So, I have tested with the user's suggested solution:

diff --git a/tails_installer/creator.py b/tails_installer/creator.py
index 95a4102..164bb48 100755
--- a/tails_installer/creator.py
+++ b/tails_installer/creator.py
-608,7 +608,7 class LinuxTailsInstallerCreator(TailsInstallerCreator):
'size': drive.props.size,
'mounted_partitions': set(),
'is_device_big_enough': True,
- 'removable': drive.props.media_removable,
+ 'removable': drive.props.removable,
}

and it starts listing again the non-removable virtual USB sticks we were using for testing.
Probably we were not using that variable because of this. I don't have at the moment one of the affected Sanddisk USB's.
If somebody has it, he/she could test it just by applying that minor change to the installer code.

#10 Updated by kurono 7 days ago

  • Assignee changed from kurono to intrigeri

#11 Updated by arnaud 3 days ago

Hey, I just happen to be working on the same topic (USB/SDCARD detection). I was also wondering about how to use the properties reported by UDisks, so I collected the output of 'udisksctl dump' for various devices I had around me. Let me share the result with you.

Device \ Property Vendor Model Removable Ejectable Media MediaAvailable MediaRemovable
USB
Silver thing Generic Flash Disk true true true true
Rotterdam School Generic Flash Disk true true true true
DT101 G2 Kingston DataTraveler 2.0 true true thumb true false
DataTraveler G3 Kingston DataTraveler 3.0 true true thumb true false
Mem Up 4GB 090c POP KEY true true true true
iPod Classic Apple iPod Classic true true true true
SDIO
Samsung 16EVO 00000 true false flash_sd true true
Marantz SDHC AF SD true false flash_sd true true
OPTICAL
DVD Drive TSSTcorp CDDVDW ... true true depends true

So it looks like MediaRemovable and Ejectable can't be trusted to detect removable devices.

Also available in: Atom PDF