file sharing in the 21st century

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Remember, the majority of users in the majority of companies only use like 5GB of storage, and mostly just documents. Needing TBs of data is a thing that happens, but normally to very isolated users and user types, and only in some businesses.

We are talking about a shared folder system. Not personal files. Huge difference.

Sure, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Not sure why you think I'm not.

Dashrender

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

In very special circumstances, sure. Right now, NextCloud doesn't offer a sync / non-sync option any other way.

OneDrive does

scottalanmiller

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Versioning protects perfectly. Exablox has 100% ransomeware protection through continuous versioning, for example.

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

In very special circumstances, sure. Right now, NextCloud doesn't offer a sync / non-sync option any other way.

OneDrive does

I know, but it's crap in general.

Donahue

I dont really want to dive any deeping into MS's pockets if I can avoid it.

Dashrender

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

Same way as any share, with backups or snaps or versioning.

Was really hoping for something a little more elegant. But I realize that’s unlikely to be possible.

Dashrender

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Versioning protects perfectly. Exablox has 100% ransomeware protection through continuous versioning, for example.

When NC does versioning, does it hide it from the typical file share browsing so that a cryptoware doesn’t know that “backup” is there?
I ask because I’ve never used any type of versioning before.

Dashrender

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

I dont really want to dive any deeping into MS's pockets if I can avoid it.

What are you using for email? If using O365 you likely already have OneDrive for business

Dashrender

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Of course, but assuming you can afford the disk space, not having to restore an entire server because an infected client encrypted a whole drive, that would be nice. Of having a fast way to roll a version back would be required.

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Versioning protects perfectly. Exablox has 100% ransomeware protection through continuous versioning, for example.

When NC does versioning, does it hide it from the typical file share browsing so that a cryptoware doesn’t know that “backup” is there?
I ask because I’ve never used any type of versioning before.

It has to, as normal file abstractions (like those used by the Windows Explorer or the Linux vfs) don't support the concept of versions, so there is no way to expose them. Until those filesystem abstractions offer their own versioning interface, all versions are invisible through those protocols (SMB, NFS, etc.)

scottalanmiller

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Of course, but assuming you can afford the disk space, not having to restore an entire server because an infected client encrypted a whole drive, that would be nice. Of having a fast way to roll a version back would be required.

Versioning often uses very little space.

Donahue

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

I dont really want to dive any deeping into MS's pockets if I can avoid it.

What are you using for email? If using O365 you likely already have OneDrive for business

we currently have hosted exchange, not o365, but I want to switch. We pay way too much. I am not sure what I want to switch to.

scottalanmiller

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

I dont really want to dive any deeping into MS's pockets if I can avoid it.

What are you using for email? If using O365 you likely already have OneDrive for business

we currently have hosted exchange, not o365, but I want to switch. We pay way too much. I am not sure what I want to switch to.

Zimbra, woot!

Dashrender

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

I dont really want to dive any deeping into MS's pockets if I can avoid it.

What are you using for email? If using O365 you likely already have OneDrive for business

we currently have hosted exchange, not o365, but I want to switch. We pay way too much. I am not sure what I want to switch to.

Zimbra, woot!

HIPAA compliant?

Donahue

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Specifically, how are folder structures or other structures, and how does that relate to user accounts?

We make a top level folder for every department.

Examples..

Personal Files (unique to every user)
HR
Accounting / Finance
Executive Management
Photo Gallery

Basically high level things that mimic security groups in the tradition mounted shares world.

I've thought of doing that, with only syncing the relevant department. But I would want to clear a lot of the dead wood from within those folders first. No reason to sync more than necessary.

black3dynamite

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share

There is an app for NC called Ransomware protection where can add extension patterns and exclude extensions patterns. It kind of works like Windows File Screening.

scottalanmiller

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Specifically, how are folder structures or other structures, and how does that relate to user accounts?

We make a top level folder for every department.

Examples..

Personal Files (unique to every user)
HR
Accounting / Finance
Executive Management
Photo Gallery

Basically high level things that mimic security groups in the tradition mounted shares world.

I've thought of doing that, with only syncing the relevant department. But I would want to clear a lot of the dead wood from within those folders first. No reason to sync more than necessary.

Right, we only sync to each person what makes sense for them individually.

scottalanmiller

@black3dynamite said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share

There is an app for NC called Ransomware protection where can add extension patterns and exclude extensions patterns. It kind of works like Windows File Screening.

We use that, too.

JaredBusch

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:

@Dashrender said in file sharing in the 21st century:

Also syncing, in my opinion. Is mostly for offline access, do your users have offline access now?

I don't think that that is often the case. Lots of people want to do that for just simple, transparent access. Lots of people dislike using the web interface to get to files.

So how do you keep problems out when syncing 100’s of GB?

How many people need to sync 100s of GBs of files? That's not normal.

If you don’t sync a file how do you get access to it? Web only?

Who needs access to that many files? Not our users, or our normal customers.

Web or WebDAV mount.

So you end up with a mixed use of sync and WebDAV.

I need access to hundreds or thousands of files on our shared drive, but I don’t need them synced... so WebDAV is my solution... how does NC protect against cryptoware on a WebDAV share?

backups, its the only true solution to cryptoware.

Versioning protects perfectly. Exablox has 100% ransomeware protection through continuous versioning, for example.

When NC does versioning, does it hide it from the typical file share browsing so that a cryptoware doesn’t know that “backup” is there?
I ask because I’ve never used any type of versioning before.

Then stop asssuming and saying random shit.

No intelligent filesync system puts versions on the local system. Not even OneDrive. Version history is in the web interface like everything else.

Obsolesce

@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:

I mentioned this in another thread, but I currently have a file server which is a 2012R2 VM sharing roughly 6TB of data. I am looking into replacing this with something more modern, so far I am checking out Nextcloud.

But having read most of the threads on ML dealing with nextcloud, and especially reading about experiences such as @guyinpv had here and here, I think we need to take a hard look at how we share files now, and why we do it the way we do it, and maybe find other methods and philosophies that we could implement for a better overall experience.

In a lot of ways, I can relate to @guyinpv, as his setup sounds a lot like mine. We currently have our VM, with a single share that is applied as a mapped drive using GPO. Inside this share is a number of root level folders, basically one for each department. Inside each of these are the typical level of nested subfolders and files. All of the first couple levels of folders from the share root were created by me, and users are locked out of being able to make changes until they are a few layers deep into their department.

Based on my research and conversations I have had, I think we have a very narrow idea of what a file share should be like, because all we know is how windows operates. As far as we treat the system, there is no one that "owns" any of the files, even though windows records an owner. No one has any sort of personal or private files that they "share" with other users. The files exist in the share that we created, and both users likely have equal permissions to said file.

I would like to expand my horizons, because I don't feel like I fully understand how other companies might use something like NC. If we are to take full advantage of what NC offers, it may require a fundamental shift in thinking by us and I want to get started on that now.

How do other people use NC? Specifically, how are folder structures or other structures, and how does that relate to user accounts? What does the anatomy of a cloud based solution look like when done well? I think I would like to use the sync client in windows, but I have only just started to play around with an online demo.

I think it's best to instead figure out what the business needs and and goals are for file service needs, and then find the appropriate technology to meet those... instead of picking out a cool featurful technology first, and the seeing if you can squeeze the businesses needs into it.