Can you post the full model number of that drive?
That may be the notorious “Seagate drive of doom”
hdparm -I /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
ATA device, with non-removable media
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E2D44M
Firmware Revision: CC24
Transport: Serial, SATA Rev 3.0
Standards:
Used: unknown (minor revision code 0x0029)
Supported: 8 7 6 5
Likely used: 8
Configuration:
Logical max current
cylinders 16383 16383
heads 16 16
sectors/track 63 63
–
CHS current addressable sectors: 16514064
LBA user addressable sectors: 268435455
LBA48 user addressable sectors: 3907029168
Logical Sector size: 512 bytes
Physical Sector size: 4096 bytes
Logical Sector-0 offset: 0 bytes
device size with M = 10241024: 1907729 MBytes
device size with M = 10001000: 2000398 MBytes (2000 GB)
cache/buffer size = unknown
Form Factor: 3.5 inch
Nominal Media Rotation Rate: 7200
Was it the 3TB drive the victims, or the 2TB ones?
Both. These are definitely vulnerable.
They issued a fix midway through the run of the ST2000DM001’s but they didn’t change the model number.
The issue was the head servo, if memory serves. That, combined with the newly built 1TB platters made those drives ripe for destruction.
1 Like
Am I the only one who can’t read a Seagate model number without misreading it as having DOOM in it, regardless of hiw very good the drives are now.
I guess the catchy click bait nickname worked too well on me, and has stuck
1 Like
Yeah, that’s why we called them the drives of doom.
1 Like
But like you said, it was only the run between those models until it was fixed.
Now the drives perform well for the price…
Backblaze being an example of how they do average out to be worth the cheap price, as long as one can afford the redundancy to cover inevitable deaths.
All drives die…
1 Like
Very true. Unfortunately.