×
The Best USB Flash Drives for Ultra-Portable Storage

The Best USB Flash Drives for Ultra-Portable Storage

Photograph: Simon Hill

Other Flash Drives We Like

We have tested many other USB flash drives that did not make the cut. Here are a few that might be worth considering for some folks.

Buffalo External SSD-PUT Stick (500 GB) for $45: Another SSD in a flash drive body, this drive hit 450 MB/s in my tests and offers shock protection for falls. There’s also a sliding USB-A, and it comes with a USB-C adapter. It is pretty chunky for a flash drive, so you may find it blocks adjacent ports. You can also get reasonably priced 1- and 2-TB versions of this drive.

PNY Pro Elite V2 (256 GB) for $25: This sliding drive has a plastic cover to protect the USB-A plug, and was our compact pick for a while. It performed well (read and write speeds hovered around 415 MB/s and 425 MB/s) in my tests, and has an opening for a lanyard or keyring. I tested the 256-GB drive, but there are 512-GB and 1-terabyte models.

SanDisk Ultra Dual Drive Go (128 GB) for $16: This handy drive swivels to give you USB-C or USB-A, and comes in various sizes and some fun colors, but the lower capacity drives are slow (USB 3.1). You can get the 128 GB drive and up in USB 3.2 Gen 1 for up to 400 MB/s read and it’s a solid alternative to the PNY Duo above.

PNY Elite-X (256 GB) for $22: This super-compact, sliding drive has a USB-C 3.2 Gen 1 jack and a loop on the end to fit on a keyring. It worked fine but proved unremarkable in my tests (around 200 MB/s read, and 130 MB/s write).

Kingston IronKey Keypad 200 (16 GB) for $103: If you need a secure drive, Kingston’s IronKey boasts FIPS 140-3 certification, XTS-AES 256-bit encryption, and a special epoxy on its circuitry to make it impossible to remove components. On the downside, it is expensive, the keypad is fiddly, and 10 wrong entries wipe the drive.

Samsung FIT Plus (256 GB) for $26: It is better-looking than our best tiny drive pick, with a metallic body and performance to match (up to 400 MB/s read for 128-GB or 256-GB drives). But Samsung’s drive is also substantially bigger and more expensive, though it does have a handy loop for a keychain.

Avoid These Flash Drives

Image may contain Lamp Adapter and Electronics

Photograph: Simon Hill

Silicon Power DS72 Portable SSD (1 TB): This is a reasonable price for a 1-TB drive with USB 3.2 Gen 2 USB-A and USB-C connectors, and it consistently hit 450 MB/s read and write speeds in my tests (it can hit 1050 MB/s and 850 MB/s with the right gear). It got quite warm to the touch, but the reason I don’t recommend this drive is the stupid plastic connector covers. You have to bend them back, and they get in the way when you’re trying to insert the drive.

Verbatim Dual (64 GB): This teeny drive is cheap and has both USB-A and USB-C plugs, but I found write speeds were variable (60 MB/s for USB-C and 90 MB/s for USB-A) and read speeds were around 150 MB/s for both. There is a cover for the USB-A and a wee strap you can attach, but this drive is almost too small, and it proved awkward to insert and remove. It also comes in 16- or 32-gigabyte options.


Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.

Source link
#USB #Flash #Drives #UltraPortable #Storage

According to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech">Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable banAccording to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech

Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech">Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable ban

According to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.

Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.

In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.

Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.

The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.

#Amazon #security #research #reportedly #led #White #Houses #Anthropic #Fable #banAI,Amazon,Anthropic,News,Policy,Politics,Security,Tech

Post Comment