|
fletcher posted:Why not just set it up as a shared folder that they can use like any other folder, and they don't have to even think about credentials or how to use it or anything. Right, that's what I'm going to do for on-site purposes, but some folks work from home and need access to files remotely. Doesn't HAVE to be on premises, but I think I'd prefer that, because offsite storage gets into a lot of HIPAA compliance stuff that tends to be fairly costly (at least based on what I've looked at thus far).
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
stimpy posted:Right, that's what I'm going to do for on-site purposes, but some folks work from home and need access to files remotely. If you have to worry about HIPAA then you really shouldn't be looking at trying to make files available via a web address even with a username/password. A good choice would be a Synology unit; easy to use UI and it supports SFTP for those off-site users.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
If your users can VPN in to the network, why wouldn't they have access to a network share and it's associated login credentials?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:If your users can VPN in to the network, why wouldn't they have access to a network share and it's associated login credentials? Right, now they do. What I inherited was an old windows 7 box that basically just had a network share setup. I'm looking at NAS to replace that, and that system will work, but people were confused by the VPN setup. I don't have any firsthand experience with NAS so I was just wondering there was one with a super easy remote access GUI so they wouldn't have to deal with VPN. But like Krailor was talking about above, I have HIPAA to deal with, so I have to check about that. The individual files themselves are password protected as well, so may be ok, but I'll have to check that out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
stimpy posted:I'm looking for a NAS setup for a small business. Realistically, we don't need huge amounts of storage, but I feel like if we're going this route that we may as well just have plenty of overhead. Even still, I'm thinking with big overhead like 5TB or less. More than 1TB is a lot of storage. The big questions are on remote access, permissions, and price. The options should be #1: DropBox, #2: Box, #3: Google Drive, #4 Synology NAS with backup to Amazon or somewhere. If it is only docs and < 25GB you can look at hosted Alfresco. I don't think any of these are even remotely HIPAA aware.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
MrMoo posted:More than 1TB is a lot of storage. The big questions are on remote access, permissions, and price. The options should be #1: DropBox, #2: Box, #3: Google Drive, #4 Synology NAS with backup to Amazon or somewhere. It looks like OneDrive for Business offers a HIPAA BAA so that might be an option to look at. Plus you should be able to combine with Office 365. This would almost certainly be the most user friendly option since it would just integrate with their windows desktop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
This entire conversation screams HIPAA violation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Moey posted:This entire conversation screams HIPAA violation. Pretty much. HIPPA is a wonderful thing, but god drat is it hard to find cloud anything that complies with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
HIPAA has a lot more to do with your application data model and its relationship to infrastructure than so much about the infrastructure itself. Specifically for sharing documents in the public (rather, multitenant) cloud, I don't think you're allowed to do that out of the control of local IT systems pretty much. Methylethylaldehyde posted:Pretty much. HIPPA is a wonderful thing, but god drat is it hard to find cloud anything that complies with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Google's infrastructure is FedRAMP compliant, meaning you're allowed to host sensitive government data (FOUO and below, I believe?) on Google infrastructure, might be worth looking into if that carries any weight with HIPAA compliance as well. e Well it's not listed on that link, but I know for a fact Gmail and Drive are, at the very least. Pudgygiant fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Nov 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
I definitely know that we can put U//FOUO on Google Drive because that's what we did at my last company and our FSO cleared that one with our customers. However, Google has stepped away from handling HIPAA legally so far as a blanket: https://cloud.google.com/terms/ quote:Unless otherwise specified in writing by Google, Google does not intend uses of the Services to create obligations under HIPAA, and makes no representations that the Services satisfy HIPAA requirements. If Customer is (or becomes) a Covered Entity or Business Associate, as defined in HIPAA, Customer will not use the Services for any purpose or in any manner involving Protected Health Information (as defined in HIPAA) unless Customer has received prior written consent to such use from Google. ...but you can do it if you sign a BAA with them http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/google-cloud-gets-board-hipaa quote:"To serve developers who want to build these applications on Google's infrastructure, we're announcing support for business associates agreements for our customers," wrote Google Cloud Platform Product Manager Matthew O'Connor, in a Feb. 5 company post. "We’re looking forward to supporting customers who are subject to HIPAA regulations on Google Cloud Platform."
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:HIPAA has a lot more to do with your application data model and its relationship to infrastructure than so much about the infrastructure itself. For a 20 person doctor's office, they want Dropbox or box.com or something to share files and store things. Neither of which are really compliant at all. There are cloud providers who are FINRA and HIPPA compliant, but I don't know of any end user usable applications that store data in the cloud and comply with those requirements. That said, I'm sure there are a bunch of cloud enabled medical applications that share data via cloud servers that maintain FINRA and HIPPA certs, but hosed if I know their names.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
Thanks for the ideas about getting the n40L open, I ended just blitzing it with a screwdriver and it gave in easily. Not like I can lock it again and why would I??
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Minty Swagger posted:Thanks for the ideas about getting the n40L open, I ended just blitzing it with a screwdriver and it gave in easily. Not like I can lock it again and why would I?? When I'm at parties I always look for an unlocked NAS to swipe a drive from
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
Methylethylaldehyde posted:For a 20 person doctor's office, they want Dropbox or box.com or something to share files and store things. Neither of which are really compliant at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
fletcher posted:When I'm at parties I always look for an unlocked NAS to swipe a drive from that's why they go in a locked server room
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
  not sure what I'm going to fill it with, suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
Lamar Smith R-TX posted:
Don Tacorleone could probably tell you the virtues of storing terabytes of porn, if he wasn't banned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:I don't mean to be That Guy but just Googling around for "dropbox hipaa" gets in the top 5 results https://www.sookasa.com/healthcare/. Also, box.com meets HIPAA and will sign BAAs. If it's Good Enough for the behemoth company I'm contracting for, it's almost certainly good enough for HIPAA (they're held to HIPAA requirements themselves, in fact). This stuff is so heavily marketed and shouted at the top of every other "cloud" BSer's lungs that basic Google searches should get you some solution these days. The reason the $20k+ / mo services exist is mostly to support and mirror the bureaucratic maze endemic to large healthcare institutions rather than to provide technical quality, usability, security, and technical scalability of said services, which makes it very inappropriate for this use case for a SMB to begin with even if they had the budget for it. Huh, my firm disallows all cloud based storage things because of HIPPA. Apparently they're using it as an excuse to not have to deal with thousands of clients with special snowflake file sharing systems sending us stuff full of SSNs and poo poo. Serves me right for not bothering to google poo poo at 3 AM.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
8-bit Miniboss posted:Don Tacorleone could probably tell you the virtues of storing terabytes of porn, if he wasn't banned. Ohh nono, it's definitely going to be loaded with a decade and a half worth of pornography, filezzzzz and etcetera I'm just not sure what drives I want to get. is there something just around the corner I should wait for in terms of platter density/speed/reliability? any impending price drops?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Lamar Smith R-TX posted:Ohh nono, it's definitely going to be loaded with a decade and a half worth of pornography, filezzzzz and etcetera 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Here are some numbers so you can look up models and judge price vs reliability yourself. Its also worth noting that there are very good reasons for using RAID6 or its equivalent rather than RAID5 with modern drive sizes. BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Nov 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Lamar Smith R-TX posted:
3TB RED's are the best deal, but 4, 5, and 6's are available, depending on how big your porn horde is. But get WD RED's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
REDs also have a hardware flesh-tone data compression encoder for h.264 which eeks out an extra 3% storage capacity for certain data types 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:REDs also have a hardware flesh-tone data compression encoder for h.264 which eeks out an extra 3% storage capacity for certain data types Wha... I've never heard of that. I assume by "certain data types" you mean h.264 video. Any articles going into depth on this specifying format support and the like?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
He's bullshitting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
I booted up XPEnology on my N40L, pretty sweet OS, definitely a visual improvement compared to my current server that uses unraid that I'm trying to escape from.  Regarding Synology units, are any of their own apps worth using at all? CloudStation (clever I guess but really needed if dropbox suits me?) Audiostation (spotify seems to be better in that aspect), video station (plex instead?) I could see their VPN software being helpful to access files from remote locations, but is there anything else that's a "must have" aside from the SAB+NZBdrone+Couchpotato suite? I also want to get a cloud based backup (crashplan/backblaze/something) going, is there a package that handles this well? Nothing in the synocommunity aside from amazon glacier sadly. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
I just checked my NAS for possible options of migrating to RAID 6 from 5, and one of my drives has a SMART warning.  I can't migrate to RAID 6 because I don't have space for the extra drive required. I also can't extend my four 1tb drives to three larger ones. It is a Qnap TS-410. It is p bad because the CPU can't really handle file transfers at high speeds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
The Download Station app I use, its decent. You can get a Chrome extension to grab and send for download to it directly that is handy. Additional indexer scripts are available in open source that let you consolidate searches to multiple BT sites at once. Media Server I use for simple DLNA service to whatever device I want in the house. Plex also works well. Photo Station I like as do the family. We can keep everything central and serve up where-ever without having to use external providers. Time Backup has a good rep from the Apple users. Cloud Station I use. On my main PC I backup My Documents to server with it. On my work notebook I use it to pull down the music folder from the server. It can be buggy though, what works suddenly breaks across releases leaving users very pissed off for a bit. Like today for instance with the 5.1 update, suddenly its broken again. NZBDrone does not support the synoindex update yet, while Sickbeard does. If you use NZBDrone you will need to reindex manually or with a scheduled task in order for it to show up in the Media Server. If you use Plex that problem goes away as NZBDrone notify to Plex works. If you use NZBDrone check their website for a more up to date installable package than Synocommunity that also supports the auto-update feature. NZBGet package is a good replacement for SAB too. Backups: http://www.hanselman.com/blog/UPDATED2014HowToSetupCrashPlanCloudBackupOnASynologyNASRunningDSM50.aspx explains how to setup Crashplan and where to get it from. Read the comments to find the errors in the write up. This is what I use, it works well and is super cheap.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Thanks! I use XBMC, so I dont think the synoindex is as important to me; but the thing that still confuses me is the shares. Looks like I could either make 1 share that holds folders of all my stuff (movies, music, documents, photos, etc) - or I could make different shares for each one. If I do the latter is there any limitation on space at all? They are all just pooled into the same bucket in the end right? Just trying to set this up best as it appears the shares are their own little "buckets" of data that cant be carried across easily.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:He's bullshitting. Oh. I get it now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Minty Swagger posted:Thanks! I use XBMC, so I dont think the synoindex is as important to me; but the thing that still confuses me is the shares. You get to define security and quota per share, other than that there's no difference, just preference for how you want to manage it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Cool. DSM can now auto-update itself as of the latest update and you can schedule the reboot at a time/day of the week.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
I have a Synology DS1513+, an Android phone and a Chromecast. What's the best way for me to play videos stored on the NAS on the Chromecast? I would like to avoid running Plex on another computer and whilst I did run Plex on the NAS itself, it has now started to struggle with HD video for no goddamn reason (it was fine a while ago).
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
I just bought the following server: CPU: 2X Xeon E5620 2.4Ghz Quad Core. RAM: 8GB (2X 4GB DDR3). HDD: None Chassis: SC826TQ-R800LPB PSU: Supermicro 800W Redundant PS. RAIl: None MB: X8DTN+ RAID: LSI 9240-8i Flashed to 9211-8i IT Mode. First 4 bays (Ports #0 - #3) are connected to on-board SATA connectors. Last 8 bays (Ports #4 - #11) are connected to LSI HBA card. with the goal of creating a NAS. A VM host would be nice too -- I have a bunch of VMs that I keep on an external hard drive and run on my desktops with VMWare Fusion. If I could host them directly on a box, that would be even better. What do you guys think? Obviously I'd want to toss more RAM in there if I wanted to host VMs, but is that even realistic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Saw that one on eBay, nice purchase. You could certainly run some VMs on that, it may not be bleeding-edge but that's way more than enough CPU to run ZFS and some machines. That board will run more RAM than you probably want to spend the money on filling it with, so go hog wild!
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
ashgromnies posted:What do you guys think? Obviously I'd want to toss more RAM in there if I wanted to host VMs, but is that even realistic? A dual socket board like that is way overkill. You'll definitely have plenty of horsepower for VMs. I'd set up a FreeNAS VM and do PCI passthrough with the LSI HBA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
SamDabbers posted:A dual socket board like that is way overkill. You'll definitely have plenty of horsepower for VMs. I'd set up a FreeNAS VM and do PCI passthrough with the LSI HBA. For experiment's sake, I'd be curious to see your FreeNAS performance numbers running on bare metal vs from inside a VM. When I was toying around with it, I could get solid 80-100MB/s up/down on bare metal, but once I sat it inside a VM it would take frequent dips below 30-40MB/s, and nothing I changed seemed to have any impact on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
How were you exposing the disks to the VM? With VT-d like that setup supports, there should be next to no impact on performance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:59 |
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:How were you exposing the disks to the VM? With VT-d like that setup supports, there should be next to no impact on performance. 2x 4x2TB Red's in RAID1Z, one set on a M1015 and the other set on the motherboard (a Supermicro X9SCM) built-in's. VT-d and all the other do-dads enabled, everything passthrough'ed, 16GB RAM, small SSD for the OS, etc. I was kinda surprised myself, actually, that there'd be a noticeable and repeatable difference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 07:54
|
|