OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning
-
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
The reason they got rid of placeholders, as I understand it, was because each placeholder took like 1-3K, if a person has thousands or more files in their OneDrive, it's possible that they could fill up a device that had only 16 GB of local memory with just placeholders.
I wonder how this new solution works.
Their saying that 9 GB of data in OneDrive uses only 3 MB locally doesn't tell us anything. Maybe that's a single 9 GB file, the fact that it would take a 3 MB local to point to it would be horrible. I'm sure that's not how it is, but you see the point.
So they moved to a system that would sync everything all the time? I'm confused as to how that is better for devices with low storage.
I don't follow?
So each placeholder took 1-3kB right? That would require ~559 thousand files (if each place holder was 3kB) to fill 16GB. That's above the maximum for OneDrive so that wouldn't make sense. They instead removed the placeholders and now are just syncing everything to the device, so if you have 4-5 really big files that you rarely use but need to keep around, they would still get synced instead of a 3kB file.
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
This is really good news!
Depending on how the links work, and if they are exposed to crypto variants.
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Right, the current way is 100% exposed, which is why I (and others) do not use it.
If the new system just sets up links to every file, I'm not sure how it would be any more secure.
It would slow a crypto malware, but not stop it. It would force network traffic for it to work, though, so far more detectable and stoppable.
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
-
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
-
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
The reason they got rid of placeholders, as I understand it, was because each placeholder took like 1-3K, if a person has thousands or more files in their OneDrive, it's possible that they could fill up a device that had only 16 GB of local memory with just placeholders.
I wonder how this new solution works.
Their saying that 9 GB of data in OneDrive uses only 3 MB locally doesn't tell us anything. Maybe that's a single 9 GB file, the fact that it would take a 3 MB local to point to it would be horrible. I'm sure that's not how it is, but you see the point.
So they moved to a system that would sync everything all the time? I'm confused as to how that is better for devices with low storage.
I don't follow?
So each placeholder took 1-3kB right? That would require ~559 thousand files (if each place holder was 3kB) to fill 16GB. That's above the maximum for OneDrive so that wouldn't make sense. They instead removed the placeholders and now are just syncing everything to the device, so if you have 4-5 really big files that you rarely use but need to keep around, they would still get synced instead of a 3kB file.
Oh, I see. yeah, they changed from placeholders to selective syncing, not full on syncing. So you could choose not to sync those 4-5 files, but sync many other smaller ones that you need with you.
As for the number of files to fill the space, I don't recall the specifics, but this was talked about during the beta stages of Windows 10 by Paul Thurrott on Windows Weekly.
-
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
-
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
-
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
And that is what I am asking.
If these "placeholders" work like that, it won't be an issue.
If they are "links" to every file, it could be.
-
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
It is? What if you're mostly an offline worker, or someone who just moves around a lot and likes to have their files with them?
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
And that is what I am asking.
If these "placeholders" work like that, it won't be an issue.
If they are "links" to every file, it could be.
The placeholders probably won't work like that. If something tries to access them outside of the MS Office environment then the files will be pulled locally edited and then resynced when the update completes.
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
And that is what I am asking.
If these "placeholders" work like that, it won't be an issue.
If they are "links" to every file, it could be.
I would have to guess that the cryptoware could 'call' the file to the local machine, then encrypt it, then it would be synced back up. If you're storing PDFs in OneDrive and open one, I would guess that it would be downloaded first to the local OneDrive folder, then opened in your viewer/editor. I have no clue if the system will automatically re-upload the file and remove the local copy immediately or not.
-
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
And that is what I am asking.
If these "placeholders" work like that, it won't be an issue.
If they are "links" to every file, it could be.
I would have to guess that the cryptoware could 'call' the file to the local machine, then encrypt it, then it would be synced back up. If you're storing PDFs in OneDrive and open one, I would guess that it would be downloaded first to the local OneDrive folder, then opened in your viewer/editor. I have no clue if the system will automatically re-upload the file and remove the local copy immediately or not.
Not sure about the last part. We'll see when Microsoft explains the process a bit more.
-
@Dashrender said
It is? What if you're mostly an offline worker, or someone who just moves around a lot and likes to have their files with them?
You'd be screwed.
Me, I am almost never offline. If I was, and had to work, I'd make my phone a hot spot.
-
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@Dashrender said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@scottalanmiller said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@coliver said
Isn't the current way even more exposed? Why does moving from full files to placeholders make it more vulnerable? Placeholders aren't for security they are designed to save space on the local disk.
Not MORE vulnerable. Equally vulnerable.
Not equally, but vulnerable.
Well, as I originally posted, it depends how they do it.
Do you consider Word 2016 is making these files vulnerable?
Depends on how you are using Word 2016. If you use the built in OneDrive integration then no they aren't vulnerable. Word works directly with the OneDrive database so it doesn't place anything, but temporary files, on the local machine.
This is assuming those files aren't already synced to the local machine.
Correct, but if you're using Word and OneDrive how they are meant to be used then that is a non-issue.
It is? What if you're mostly an offline worker, or someone who just moves around a lot and likes to have their files with them?
Umm.... then don't use OneDrive?
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
Right, the current way is 100% exposed, which is why I (and others) do not use it.
The problem with this statement is that you are not using a tool that provides solid access to files because it does not prevent crypto fro affecting the files?
WTF?
This is a sync tool for access to files, not a backup solution. You use a backup solution to protect from something like crypto loss. Not a file sync application.
Do not mix up the point of products, FFS.
-
JB makes a good point. Do you need syncing? If you do, then you have to do what needs to be done to make it work. And clearly in this case, making it work does not save you from cryptoware.
-
@JaredBusch said
Do not mix up the point of products, FFS.
Who is mixing up the point of products?
I am not using OneDrive for backup, nor am I suggesting it.
-
@BRRABill said in OneDrive Placeholders Are Returning:
@JaredBusch said
Do not mix up the point of products, FFS.
Who is mixing up the point of products?
I am not using OneDrive for backup, nor am I suggesting it.
No, you stated that you refuse to use it because it does nothing to prevent crypto from affecting the files.
It is a file sync program that has nothing to do with preventing crypto.
So your entire premise of not using it is not valid.
-
@JaredBusch said
No, you stated that you refuse to use it because it does nothing to prevent crypto from affecting the files.
It is a file sync program that has nothing to do with preventing crypto.
So your entire premise of not using it is not valid.
OK, so I went back and read what I wrote. You are correct in interpreting what my words actually said. What I mean to say is ... I do not use it to sync. My main concern/reason was to not have data locally on my machine, rather than anything to do with crypto- stuff.
I use it without syncing, and it works perfectly for me. Could I sync, and then add the extra step of backing those files up, sure. But it is working fine for me as-is. Would I like a "file structure" on my local PC that works like the way you can easily access OneDrive like the Office apps do? Sure.
