<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">+1^n <br><br>Buying a nas is like using a mac. Sure. It's easy. Until it's not.<br><br>Building a nas makes it yours.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On November 30, 2018 9:27:12 PM EST, Jeff Hubbs via Ale <ale@ale.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/30/18 3:26 PM, Alex Carver via
Ale wrote:
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:5d78d931-4c7f-49b8-c227-126f56e90db8@acarver.net">
<pre wrap="">Given the proliferation of various boxed NAS devices like Synology,
QNAP, etc. </pre>
</blockquote>
Avoid them all. I have never seen such a device used where a
situation didn't eventually arise where it wouldn't have been a
crisis if it had instead been a proper admin-controlled Linux system
running Samba, NFS, etc. <br>
<br>
The horrors come down to one simple characteristic: having your
*only* access to the shared filesystem be over the network using the
associated protocol. An enterprise-grade 26-drive file server I
built for A Previous Employer<sup>tm</sup> was able to scan its
shared-out filesystem for viruses using ClamAV at over 200MiB/s and
was awesome for performing searches for files that a user had
misplaced due to an errant mouse drag. It made squashfs files as
online backups every night in parallel with printing to tape over a
captive net shared with an auxiliary warm-spare file server and a
derelict Sun Sunfire connected to a SCSI tape library.<br>
<br>
I could go on and on but really, prefab NASses are for people who
don't have a way to do anything else. That's perfectly fine, of
course - but we run Linux to not be constrained like that.<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>-- <br>Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. All tyopes are thumb related and reflect authenticity.</body></html>