Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Home NAS question: NAS Suggestions for Dummies needed

Last response: in Storage
Share
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 23, 2005 2:05:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Win2K, SP4

I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about
potential theft of my home computer, as many important documents are
kept on it. While the files are password protected, my thought is that
it would be more reasonable to put in one of the little NAS boxes that
have been proliferating over the past year or so and using it as a
repository for my more personal files as a hedge against identity
theft. My house is wired and there are many places where I can stash
the hardware.

Assuming that the thought is a reasonable one, there are some qustions
that I have about how the home NAS works. My assumption is that I could
do the same thing with a spare computer by putting the extra computer
somewhere and mapping the drive to my desktop. I have some spare parts
and could build a computer but by the time I put the OS on it and buy a
few parts, I may be to the point of the cost of a NAS. The other option
is to purchase a NAS.

How do they work? By that I mean what OS do they use that allows them
to work with Windows without requiring a whole computer along with it?

Also, what about the issue of backup? If I have the NAS stashed
somewhere with all of my personal financial info on it and the NAS
crashes, I am in deep doodoo. If I back up the NAS to my computer, I
have defeated the purpose of remote storage...

Does someone have suggestions about a strategy for NAS with backup that
solves these problems?

Thanks
Ken K
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 23, 2005 7:22:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ken K wrote:

> Win2K, SP4
>
> I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about
> potential theft of my home computer, as many important documents are
> kept on it. While the files are password protected, my thought is that
> it would be more reasonable to put in one of the little NAS boxes that
> have been proliferating over the past year or so and using it as a
> repository for my more personal files as a hedge against identity
> theft. My house is wired and there are many places where I can stash
> the hardware.
>
> Assuming that the thought is a reasonable one, there are some qustions
> that I have about how the home NAS works. My assumption is that I could
> do the same thing with a spare computer by putting the extra computer
> somewhere and mapping the drive to my desktop. I have some spare parts
> and could build a computer but by the time I put the OS on it and buy a
> few parts, I may be to the point of the cost of a NAS. The other option
> is to purchase a NAS.
>
> How do they work? By that I mean what OS do they use that allows them
> to work with Windows without requiring a whole computer along with it?
>
> Also, what about the issue of backup? If I have the NAS stashed
> somewhere with all of my personal financial info on it and the NAS
> crashes, I am in deep doodoo. If I back up the NAS to my computer, I
> have defeated the purpose of remote storage...
>
> Does someone have suggestions about a strategy for NAS with backup that
> solves these problems?

Let me make sure I understand what you want to do--you want to keep your
"sensitive" information somewhere other than on your primary computer
because you are concerned that someone will steal your computer and use the
information contained on it for purposes of identity theft.

First, the current system you're using with password protection is _not_
secure. The password prevents the application from opening the file but
does not prevent it from being accessed using other applications that do
not respect the password system--the files are _not_ encrypted.

If you are using Windows 2000 or later you can provide a good deal of
protection by using the Encrypting File System that is built into those
operating systems--with Linux there is a similar technology available. In
Windows, to encrypt, just right-click on the file or folder, select
"properties", "advanced", and "encrypt". Decryption is transparent. If
you do that, make sure that you read everything that is in the help files
about "Encrypted File System", make sure you locate and encrypt the folders
where your applications store temporary files, make sure you have good
login names and passwords, and DO NOT LOSE YOUR KEYS--keep copies in a safe
place. You should also periodically sanitize the free space on your
disk--there may be unlinked allocation units that still contain data that
can be recovered by a determined attacker.

Now, your NAS storage idea is not going to make your system any more secure
unless you make sure that all your sensitive files, including any temporary
copies made by your applications, go on the NAS, and then anyone who is
stealing your machine for purposes of identity theft is likely to trace out
your cabling and take the NAS as well, unless you go wireless, and that
raises a whole new set of security issues. You'd do best to use the NAS
for backup and to do that use whatever backup program you prefer and then
encrypt the backup file.

Now, as for your other questions, a typical NAS _does_ have "a whole
computer along with it". Just stripped down to the bare essentials
necessary for the application--there's no trick to miniaturizing enough
computing power for that--many cell phones have more than enough.
Typically they run Linux but some may be running proprietary operating
systems. To build an NAS, just put your pieces together and put Linux on
it with appropriate network file systems--for Windows you'd use
SAMBA--remember that despite the fact that you see Linux in boxes in stores
with prices on them, Linux is GPL and available for the time it takes to
download and burn a CD. If you've never run Linux before you'll find it
an interesting and educational experience.



> Thanks
> Ken K

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 23, 2005 10:12:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Ken K" <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com> wrote in message
news:111pks2mu000pf3@corp.supernews.com...
> Also, what about the issue of backup? If I have the NAS stashed somewhere
> with all of my personal financial info on it and the NAS crashes, I am in
> deep doodoo. If I back up the NAS to my computer, I have defeated the
> purpose of remote storage...
>
> Does someone have suggestions about a strategy for NAS with backup that
> solves these problems?
>
> Thanks
> Ken K

Best you can do without actually having off-site backup, is to use RAID or
another redundant scheme. Remember, RAID doesn't protect against lightning
strikes or other freaks incidents that can destroy 2 drives at once. I have
seen it happen firsthand. Offsite backup is necessary for good insurance.

You pretty much have to backup somehow.

--Dan
Related resources
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 24, 2005 10:11:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com> wrote in
message news:111pks2mu000pf3@corp.supernews.com...

> Win2K, SP4

> I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about potential
> theft of my home computer, as many important documents are kept on it. While
> the files are password protected, my thought is that it would be more
> reasonable to put in one of the little NAS boxes that have been proliferating
> over the past year or so and using it as a repository for my more personal
> files as a hedge against identity theft. My house is wired and there are many
> places where I can stash the hardware.

> Assuming that the thought is a reasonable one,

It is.

> there are some qustions that I have about how the home NAS works. My
> assumption is that I could do the same thing with a spare computer by putting
> the extra computer somewhere and mapping the drive to my desktop.

Yes, you can, but that wouldnt be as easy to hide, physically much bigger.

> I have some spare parts and could build a computer but by the time I put the
> OS on it and buy a few parts, I may be to the point of the cost of a NAS.

Really depends on what you need to buy.

> The other option is to purchase a NAS.

> How do they work? By that I mean what OS do they use that allows them to work
> with Windows without requiring a whole computer along with it?

They dont have a true OS, they just have what they need in rom and
they just appear as a device with an ip for config, like a hardware
router does. Normally they appear as a web page at that ip.

> Also, what about the issue of backup? If I have the NAS stashed somewhere
> with all of my personal financial info on it and the NAS crashes, I am in deep
> doodoo. If I back up the NAS to my computer, I have defeated the purpose of
> remote storage...

Nothing to stop you backing up the contents of
the NAS onto CDs or DVDs and hiding those or
taking them offsite for the ultimate in backup.

> Does someone have suggestions about a strategy for NAS with backup that solves
> these problems?

Just backup to removable media just like you would do otherwise.
The NAS is just a set of files etc, just like any other storage.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 24, 2005 12:09:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Ken K" <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com> wrote in message
news:111pks2mu000pf3@corp.supernews.com...
> Win2K, SP4
>
> I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about
> potential theft of my home computer,

Might be of interest...

http://www.grisby.org/burglar.html

Quote: "This man's name is Ben Park. He broke in to my flat in the South of
Cambridge on Friday 4th February 2005. I had a video camera with motion
detection software set up on my computer. It captured these images of him. "

The story made the BBC news recently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/42720...
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 24, 2005 1:28:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:03 -0800, Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com>
wrote:

>Win2K, SP4
>
>I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about
>potential theft of my home computer, as many important documents are
>kept on it.

I've been looking at the same thing, and haven't yet found an
inexpensive NAS system that does what I want. I'm thinking about
setting up a spare laptop with an external USB drive on it out in the
garage, figuring it's easy to hide reasonably well and will provide
backup redundancy and theft protection. Still, the idea of a small,
dedicated NAS box is compelling.

Here are the issues I've seen or read about with home NAS. YMMV, as
always, and some problems may be fixed by now.

- Many of the inexpensive NAS systems are still buggy. Whether the
bugs are acceptable depends on your application. It's not really a
mature field yet. If you do a google/usenet search on the model
you're interested in, you'll find reviews and discussions of these.
In particular, the D-link NDS-120 and Linksys EFG120 are thrashed by
users who claim they're not ready for prime time.

- Some NAS systems aren't file-system compatible with NTFS, like the
Linksys NSLU2 (an interface to external HDs), which reformats any
drive connected to it into a format unreadable by XP out of the box.
Likewise, an extra drive added to the Buffalotech Linkstation is
read-only unless you let the Buffalo format it first. It also has
some filename limitations and software bugs. The D-link NDS-120
doesn't support NTFS well.

- The Ximeta requires a driver on the client PC, so loses some
flexibility there, but it also works as a PnP USB drive, so that makes
up for it some. Their drivers were buggy last time I tried one, but
they claim to have improved them, and I may give them another shot.

- I'm interested in one that will let you daisy-chain additional USB
drives as NAS storage, and many of them (like the linkstation) don't
allow decent security (or any security) on the daisy-chained drives.

There's more, but much of this is second-hand data, as I'm not up to
buying every single one and testing them. Again, do some extensive
web searches on the boxes you're interested in to see if the
limitations are acceptable to you. Be sure to check the FAQs and
support documents for the vendors, as they often highlight user
problems.

Good luck, and keep us posted on your experiences!


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 24, 2005 10:31:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I really like Shuttle systems. I have setup one as a NAS box using no
keyboard, no mouse, no monitor. The machine turns itself on at a specified
time (in bios), the backup occurs, the machine shuts down when done. The
secretary arrives at work, swaps drives, works the day, goes home, and the
cycle repeats.

Total cost around $400. The system is so small it could be hidden almost
anywhere.

--Dan

"Neil Maxwell" <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote in message
news:if5s11tpto0a6dh80uimu4lkha9ast2cr7@4ax.com...
> I've been looking at the same thing, and haven't yet found an
> inexpensive NAS system that does what I want. I'm thinking about
> setting up a spare laptop with an external USB drive on it out in the
> garage, figuring it's easy to hide reasonably well and will provide
> backup redundancy and theft protection. Still, the idea of a small,
> dedicated NAS box is compelling.
>
> Here are the issues I've seen or read about with home NAS. YMMV, as
> always, and some problems may be fixed by now.
>
> - Many of the inexpensive NAS systems are still buggy. Whether the
> bugs are acceptable depends on your application. It's not really a
> mature field yet. If you do a google/usenet search on the model
> you're interested in, you'll find reviews and discussions of these.
> In particular, the D-link NDS-120 and Linksys EFG120 are thrashed by
> users who claim they're not ready for prime time.
>
> - Some NAS systems aren't file-system compatible with NTFS, like the
> Linksys NSLU2 (an interface to external HDs), which reformats any
> drive connected to it into a format unreadable by XP out of the box.
> Likewise, an extra drive added to the Buffalotech Linkstation is
> read-only unless you let the Buffalo format it first. It also has
> some filename limitations and software bugs. The D-link NDS-120
> doesn't support NTFS well.
>
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 1:58:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Ken K" <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com> wrote in message
news:421E4ACE.40308@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com...
Thanks for the post. The price is just fine. I would be grateful if you
can give me a little more info about the hardware involved and what OS you
are using. I have built some computers and done upgrades but I am no
computer jock. I presently have a removable SATA drive in a caddy that I
use for my backup that would probably work.

If you have some time to be a bit more specific, I would be grateful.

Thanks
Ken K
----------------------------------------------------

I used a Shuttle SS51G, newegg has refurbs for $115
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?descripti...

2.4ghz celeron $72 newegg
512MB ram $55 newegg
WD 40GB drive for OS $48 newegg --here you could just use 1 big drive for
data and OS.

I use removable trays for convenience, but you may not need to:

Antec removeable drive tray $35 newegg
I use 120GB WD drives for backup drives.

I am using XP as an OS, which I didn't add into the build cost. I am not
using floppy or CD rom drives, I used USB drives to do the XP install. The
build was simple, and those shuttles are fun.

--Dan
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 1:58:57 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:58:56 GMT, "dg" <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I am using XP as an OS, which I didn't add into the build cost. I am not
>using floppy or CD rom drives, I used USB drives to do the XP install. The
>build was simple, and those shuttles are fun.

That looks pretty ideal, though I'd consider bumping up to the 865
chipset. Do you have to plug in a monitor and such for administration
now and again, or can you do all the management over the net?


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 2:34:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Neil Maxwell wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:03 -0800, Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Win2K, SP4
>>
>>I have a home network and have been increasingly concerned about
>>potential theft of my home computer, as many important documents are
>>kept on it.
>
> I've been looking at the same thing, and haven't yet found an
> inexpensive NAS system that does what I want. I'm thinking about
> setting up a spare laptop with an external USB drive on it out in the
> garage, figuring it's easy to hide reasonably well and will provide
> backup redundancy and theft protection. Still, the idea of a small,
> dedicated NAS box is compelling.
>
> Here are the issues I've seen or read about with home NAS. YMMV, as
> always, and some problems may be fixed by now.
>
> - Many of the inexpensive NAS systems are still buggy. Whether the
> bugs are acceptable depends on your application. It's not really a
> mature field yet. If you do a google/usenet search on the model
> you're interested in, you'll find reviews and discussions of these.
> In particular, the D-link NDS-120 and Linksys EFG120 are thrashed by
> users who claim they're not ready for prime time.
>
> - Some NAS systems aren't file-system compatible with NTFS, like the
> Linksys NSLU2 (an interface to external HDs), which reformats any
> drive connected to it into a format unreadable by XP out of the box.
> Likewise, an extra drive added to the Buffalotech Linkstation is
> read-only unless you let the Buffalo format it first. It also has
> some filename limitations and software bugs. The D-link NDS-120
> doesn't support NTFS well.

Why is this an issue? The purpose of NAS is not to attach an NTFS drive
that you pulled out of something else, it's to serve up data on the
network. My Novell server can't read NTFS, but that doesn't have an iota
of effect on its functionality as a file server.

> - The Ximeta requires a driver on the client PC, so loses some
> flexibility there, but it also works as a PnP USB drive, so that makes
> up for it some. Their drivers were buggy last time I tried one, but
> they claim to have improved them, and I may give them another shot.
>
> - I'm interested in one that will let you daisy-chain additional USB
> drives as NAS storage, and many of them (like the linkstation) don't
> allow decent security (or any security) on the daisy-chained drives.

Geez, this is turning into Rube Goldberg. Just build a server for God's
sake.

> There's more, but much of this is second-hand data, as I'm not up to
> buying every single one and testing them. Again, do some extensive
> web searches on the boxes you're interested in to see if the
> limitations are acceptable to you. Be sure to check the FAQs and
> support documents for the vendors, as they often highlight user
> problems.
>
> Good luck, and keep us posted on your experiences!
>
>
> --
> Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 2:41:05 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Neil Maxwell" <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote in message
news:if5s11tpto0a6dh80uimu4lkha9ast2cr7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:03 -0800, Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com>
> wrote:

What do you think of Maxtor Network Storage?

http://www.maxtor.com/_files/maxtor/en_us/documentation...


--
Aloke
----
to reply by e-mail remove 123 and change invalid to com
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 2:41:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:41:05 GMT, "Aloke Prasad"
<aprasad123@columbus.rr.invalid> wrote:
>
>"Neil Maxwell" <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote in message
>news:if5s11tpto0a6dh80uimu4lkha9ast2cr7@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:03 -0800, Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com>
>> wrote:
>
>What do you think of Maxtor Network Storage?
>
>http://www.maxtor.com/_files/maxtor/en_us/documentation...

This one is pretty new, and all I could find on it is marketing
releases. That was a month or so ago. If they're actually in the
retail channel, there may be some reviews starting to come in.

I've been pretty happy with my Maxtor externals, but whether they can
pull off user-friendly home NAS is still up in the air. I'm looking
forward to seeing some reviews on it.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 7:23:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Neil Maxwell" <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote in message
news:67ts11pslvd9557c7b30os26920bfks1mh@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:58:56 GMT, "dg" <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote:
> That looks pretty ideal, though I'd consider bumping up to the 865
> chipset. Do you have to plug in a monitor and such for administration
> now and again, or can you do all the management over the net?
>
>

The reason I was using the SS51G for this project was the price. It is a
cheap platform to start from for such basic use, but I would have preferred
to go with a higher end chipset for other uses. It looks like the SS51G is
pretty much phased out, as seemingly the only available units are refurbed.

To be completely honest, on the NAS box I do have a keyboard, mouse, and
monitor connected via a KVM switch, which is also connected to a 2003 server
and the secretaries workstation. I rarely turn the box on and log in, as
the backup logs are stored on the server and I can be sure the backups are
working correctly just by the logs. I really wanted to make a point of
saying that it COULD be used without a keyboard or anything else, it can be
tucked away anywhere there is power and ethernet and will work just fine-as
long as you disable "halt on keyboard error" in the bios. I actually use
another SS51G for my home theater PC which does NOT use a keyboard and mouse
at the moment-and I do remotely control the PC using software called VNC.
The SS51G is a great budget HTPC, it has optical audio or analog surround
sound, firewire and USB 2.0. I put in a nice AGP video card and a PCI HDTV
tuner card, filling the available slots, but also filling any need I have
for the box.

--Dan
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 25, 2005 12:44:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:34:19 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

>Neil Maxwell wrote:
>
>> - Some NAS systems aren't file-system compatible with NTFS, like the
>> Linksys NSLU2 (an interface to external HDs), which reformats any
>> drive connected to it into a format unreadable by XP out of the box.
>> Likewise, an extra drive added to the Buffalotech Linkstation is
>> read-only unless you let the Buffalo format it first. It also has
>> some filename limitations and software bugs. The D-link NDS-120
>> doesn't support NTFS well.
>
>Why is this an issue? The purpose of NAS is not to attach an NTFS drive
>that you pulled out of something else, it's to serve up data on the
>network. My Novell server can't read NTFS, but that doesn't have an iota
>of effect on its functionality as a file server.

I like flexibility and simplicity, and the option of plugging the
drive directly into a pc and using it for direct non-networked
backup/restore is appealing to me. I recently had to do this, and it
saved my bacon.

My need isn't for file-server NAS per se (though that would be a
secondary function), but for a networked redundant backup archive,
which (for me) sometimes requires direct connection to a box booted
from a True Image CD. This sounded like the sort of thing the OP was
also after, to some extent, so I thought I'd throw in my observations
from that perspective.

Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable. One
of these dedicated boxes would do for that, except I want that
plug-into-any-XP-box functionality as well.

>> - I'm interested in one that will let you daisy-chain additional USB
>> drives as NAS storage, and many of them (like the linkstation) don't
>> allow decent security (or any security) on the daisy-chained drives.
>
>Geez, this is turning into Rube Goldberg. Just build a server for God's
>sake.

As I said, that's an option, but it's another PC to maintain, and
another OS if you use something like Samba. I've got plenty of PCs
and a few spare laptops, but I'm after a simple, flexible, robust,
expandable solution that won't take a lot of fiddling with to either
set up or maintain. It doesn't seem like such a thing is available
right now, so I'll probably go with either a Shuttle-style mini-box or
a laptop as a backup server, while waiting for home NAS to hit prime
time.

I believe there's an untapped market for this kind of thing, and it
appears the vendors do as well. Eventually, there will be a 90%
perfect solution for a reasonable price, but the technology is still
in the bronze age right now.

YMMV, as always; this is just what I'm hunting for.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 26, 2005 10:41:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:cvovr80mgu@news2.newsguy.com...
> > Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
> > archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable.
>
> You want to have the device _running_ in a safe? There are so many things
> wrong with that idea that I don't know where to begin.

There are some issues, but I admit I myself have thought about this several
times. The idea occurred to me when I was putting some backups in my safe,
I started thinking how cool it would be to just backup TO the safe over
ethernet. There is always a heat issue, but if the device can be low enough
power you MIGHT be able to get away with it. Many folks with gun safes put
something in them called a "goldenrod" that is basically a small heating
element that keeps the temperature high enough that moisture doesn't cause
rust. Perhaps the NAS device could act the same way-you could kill two
birds.

Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred to me, but I don't think I am going
to do it.

--Dan
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 27, 2005 10:33:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

dg <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Rh4Ud.999$C47.555@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote

>>> Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
>>> archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable.

>> You want to have the device _running_ in a safe? There are so
>> many things wrong with that idea that I don't know where to begin.

> There are some issues, but I admit I myself have thought about this several
> times. The idea occurred to me when I was putting some backups in my safe,
> I started thinking how cool it would be to just backup TO the safe over
> ethernet. There is always a heat issue, but if the device can be low enough
> power you MIGHT be able to get away with it. Many folks with gun safes put
> something in them called a "goldenrod" that is basically a small heating
> element that keeps the temperature high enough that moisture doesn't cause
> rust. Perhaps the NAS device could act the same way-you could kill two birds.

> Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
> to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.

Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.

Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS, as opposed to a dinosaur PC as a NAS.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 27, 2005 10:33:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:38c4pgF5n1j7gU1@individual.net...
> > Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
> > to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.
>
> Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.
>
> Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS, as opposed to a dinosaur PC as
a NAS.
>

And fires too, depending on the safe. Good safes have ratings for
temperature inside the safe vs. temp outside the safe for a specified period
of time. And luckily most fires don't reach those stated temps for periods
anywhere near the rating. Not quite an offsite backup but pretty good.

--Dan
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 27, 2005 10:50:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

dg wrote:

> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:38c4pgF5n1j7gU1@individual.net...
>> > Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
>> > to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.
>>
>> Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.
>>
>> Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS, as opposed to a dinosaur PC as
> a NAS.
>>
>
> And fires too, depending on the safe. Good safes have ratings for
> temperature inside the safe vs. temp outside the safe for a specified
> period
> of time. And luckily most fires don't reach those stated temps for
> periods
> anywhere near the rating. Not quite an offsite backup but pretty good.

That is of course, unless the NAS catches fire. While rare, electronic
devices do occasionally fail in this mode.

Further, most safes are designed to protect paper, not electronics--it's
quite possible for all the paper to have survived but the disk to be
completely wiped. It's important that a data-grade safe be used in this
scenario.

And I'm still a little puzzled about how a "discrete hardware NAS" is
different from "a dinosaur PC as a NAS". In case it has escaped your
notice, there are many low-power single board PCs out there, some of which
run off a wall-wart.

In fact some of the "discrete hardware NASA" are exactly that, a Via Epia
micro- or nano-ITX motherboard, a disk, and a fan in a pretty box.


> --Dan

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 27, 2005 7:27:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

dg <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wHcUd.9783$Pz7.7515@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
>>> to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.

>> Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.

>> Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS,
>> as opposed to a dinosaur PC as a NAS.

> And fires too, depending on the safe.

Thats much more tricky. Flood too. Fire resistant safes, particularly
the sort of smaller safes that are practical for use in houses, get their
fire resistance by whats used to insulate them reacting to the fire.
The way they do that wouldnt be good for the NAS in that safe.

> Good safes have ratings for temperature inside the
> safe vs. temp outside the safe for a specified period
> of time. And luckily most fires don't reach those
> stated temps for periods anywhere near the rating.

Sure, particularly in domestic houses.

> Not quite an offsite backup but pretty good.

Not really with fire protection, because of the way they get that.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 28, 2005 7:52:50 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:cvsgas017o7@news2.newsguy.com...
> dg wrote:
>
>> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:38c4pgF5n1j7gU1@individual.net...
>>> > Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
>>> > to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.
>>>
>>> Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.
>>>
>>> Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS, as opposed to a dinosaur PC as
>> a NAS.
>>>
>>
>> And fires too, depending on the safe. Good safes have ratings for
>> temperature inside the safe vs. temp outside the safe for a specified
>> period
>> of time. And luckily most fires don't reach those stated temps for
>> periods
>> anywhere near the rating. Not quite an offsite backup but pretty good.
>
> That is of course, unless the NAS catches fire. While rare, electronic
> devices do occasionally fail in this mode.
>
> Further, most safes are designed to protect paper, not electronics--it's
> quite possible for all the paper to have survived but the disk to be
> completely wiped. It's important that a data-grade safe be used in this
> scenario.

> And I'm still a little puzzled about how a "discrete hardware
> NAS" is different from "a dinosaur PC as a NAS".

I meant the standalone NAS boxes that are physically like an
external drive except that they are full lan devices, as opposed to
the same thing constructed out of an older obsolete discarded PC.

> In case it has escaped your notice, there are many low-power
> single board PCs out there, some of which run off a wall-wart.

Sure, I wasnt commenting on those, just those two other extremes.

> In fact some of the "discrete hardware NASA" are exactly that, a Via
> Epia micro- or nano-ITX motherboard, a disk, and a fan in a pretty box.

See above.
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 28, 2005 2:22:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:27:28 +1100, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>dg <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:wHcUd.9783$Pz7.7515@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>
>>>> Anyway, the safe idea has also occurred
>>>> to me, but I don't think I am going to do it.
>
>>> Should work fine, for protection against burglars, anyway.
>
>>> Particularly with a discrete hardware NAS,
>>> as opposed to a dinosaur PC as a NAS.
>
>> And fires too, depending on the safe.
>
>Thats much more tricky. Flood too. Fire resistant safes, particularly
>the sort of smaller safes that are practical for use in houses, get their
>fire resistance by whats used to insulate them reacting to the fire.
>The way they do that wouldnt be good for the NAS in that safe.

Yep, most fire resistance is gained by a material (often sheetrock)
that gives off moisture when heated, keeping the temperature lower,
but damaging items that are sensitive to moisture. Many gun safes
aren't designed for as much fire resistance because the combination of
high temps and high moisture can be more damaging to steel than just
high temperature.

>> Good safes have ratings for temperature inside the
>> safe vs. temp outside the safe for a specified period
>> of time. And luckily most fires don't reach those
>> stated temps for periods anywhere near the rating.
>
>Sure, particularly in domestic houses.
>
>> Not quite an offsite backup but pretty good.
>
>Not really with fire protection, because of the way they get that.

It's better than nothing, and will protect from minor fires, but
definitely not ideal for major fire protection. It's all part of the
risk analysis tradeoff.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 28, 2005 2:26:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:41:37 GMT, "dg" <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
>news:cvovr80mgu@news2.newsguy.com...
>> > Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
>> > archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable.
>>
>> You want to have the device _running_ in a safe? There are so many things
>> wrong with that idea that I don't know where to begin.
>
>There are some issues, but I admit I myself have thought about this several
>times. The idea occurred to me when I was putting some backups in my safe,
>I started thinking how cool it would be to just backup TO the safe over
>ethernet. There is always a heat issue, but if the device can be low enough
>power you MIGHT be able to get away with it. Many folks with gun safes put
>something in them called a "goldenrod" that is basically a small heating
>element that keeps the temperature high enough that moisture doesn't cause
>rust. Perhaps the NAS device could act the same way-you could kill two
>birds.

I have a Goldenrod in my safe, and the small NAS devices I've tried
run cooler than the Goldenrod. It will work the same, though, as all
you need is to keep the inside a few degrees warmer than the outside
so you don't get condensation. All bets are off if you store
something moist inside the safe!

You wouldn't want to put a PC or a hot-running HD inside, but
lower-power devices should be OK.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 28, 2005 4:59:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Check out NASLite or NASLite+ - it's a mini-Linux distribution made for
NAS systems. It sounds like a good way to put old hardware to work.

Neil Maxwell wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:34:19 -0500, "J. Clarke"
> <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>Neil Maxwell wrote:
>>
>>
>>>- Some NAS systems aren't file-system compatible with NTFS, like the
>>>Linksys NSLU2 (an interface to external HDs), which reformats any
>>>drive connected to it into a format unreadable by XP out of the box.
>>>Likewise, an extra drive added to the Buffalotech Linkstation is
>>>read-only unless you let the Buffalo format it first. It also has
>>>some filename limitations and software bugs. The D-link NDS-120
>>>doesn't support NTFS well.
>>
>>Why is this an issue? The purpose of NAS is not to attach an NTFS drive
>>that you pulled out of something else, it's to serve up data on the
>>network. My Novell server can't read NTFS, but that doesn't have an iota
>>of effect on its functionality as a file server.
>
>
> I like flexibility and simplicity, and the option of plugging the
> drive directly into a pc and using it for direct non-networked
> backup/restore is appealing to me. I recently had to do this, and it
> saved my bacon.
>
> My need isn't for file-server NAS per se (though that would be a
> secondary function), but for a networked redundant backup archive,
> which (for me) sometimes requires direct connection to a box booted
> from a True Image CD. This sounded like the sort of thing the OP was
> also after, to some extent, so I thought I'd throw in my observations
> from that perspective.
>
> Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
> archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable. One
> of these dedicated boxes would do for that, except I want that
> plug-into-any-XP-box functionality as well.
>
>
>>>- I'm interested in one that will let you daisy-chain additional USB
>>>drives as NAS storage, and many of them (like the linkstation) don't
>>>allow decent security (or any security) on the daisy-chained drives.
>>
>>Geez, this is turning into Rube Goldberg. Just build a server for God's
>>sake.
>
>
> As I said, that's an option, but it's another PC to maintain, and
> another OS if you use something like Samba. I've got plenty of PCs
> and a few spare laptops, but I'm after a simple, flexible, robust,
> expandable solution that won't take a lot of fiddling with to either
> set up or maintain. It doesn't seem like such a thing is available
> right now, so I'll probably go with either a Shuttle-style mini-box or
> a laptop as a backup server, while waiting for home NAS to hit prime
> time.
>
> I believe there's an untapped market for this kind of thing, and it
> appears the vendors do as well. Eventually, there will be a 90%
> perfect solution for a reasonable price, but the technology is still
> in the bronze age right now.
>
> YMMV, as always; this is just what I'm hunting for.
>
>
> --
> Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
February 28, 2005 8:21:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Neil Maxwell wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:41:37 GMT, "dg" <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:cvovr80mgu@news2.newsguy.com...
>>> > Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
>>> > archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable.
>>>
>>> You want to have the device _running_ in a safe? There are so many
>>> things wrong with that idea that I don't know where to begin.
>>
>>There are some issues, but I admit I myself have thought about this
>>several
>>times. The idea occurred to me when I was putting some backups in my
>>safe, I started thinking how cool it would be to just backup TO the safe
>>over
>>ethernet. There is always a heat issue, but if the device can be low
>>enough
>>power you MIGHT be able to get away with it. Many folks with gun safes
>>put something in them called a "goldenrod" that is basically a small
>>heating element that keeps the temperature high enough that moisture
>>doesn't cause
>>rust. Perhaps the NAS device could act the same way-you could kill two
>>birds.
>
> I have a Goldenrod in my safe, and the small NAS devices I've tried
> run cooler than the Goldenrod.

Do they with no airflow?

> It will work the same, though, as all
> you need is to keep the inside a few degrees warmer than the outside
> so you don't get condensation. All bets are off if you store
> something moist inside the safe!
>
> You wouldn't want to put a PC or a hot-running HD inside, but
> lower-power devices should be OK.

So where do you find a "cool running HD"? There's nothing magic about the
ones in NAS, they're the same ones you buy at CompUSA.
>
>
> --
> Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
a b G Storage
March 1, 2005 1:09:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:21:52 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

>Neil Maxwell wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:41:37 GMT, "dg" <dan_gus@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
>>>news:cvovr80mgu@news2.newsguy.com...
>>>> > Ultimately, my goal is to have a low-power, low-maintenance backup
>>>> > archive in my safe, with just a power cable and a network cable.
>>>>
>>>> You want to have the device _running_ in a safe? There are so many
>>>> things wrong with that idea that I don't know where to begin.
>>>
>>>There are some issues, but I admit I myself have thought about this
>>>several
>>>times. The idea occurred to me when I was putting some backups in my
>>>safe, I started thinking how cool it would be to just backup TO the safe
>>>over
>>>ethernet. There is always a heat issue, but if the device can be low
>>>enough
>>>power you MIGHT be able to get away with it. Many folks with gun safes
>>>put something in them called a "goldenrod" that is basically a small
>>>heating element that keeps the temperature high enough that moisture
>>>doesn't cause
>>>rust. Perhaps the NAS device could act the same way-you could kill two
>>>birds.
>>
>> I have a Goldenrod in my safe, and the small NAS devices I've tried
>> run cooler than the Goldenrod.
>
>Do they with no airflow?

My safe is the size of a small closet, and I'd have the same concerns
about putting an external drive in a closet with the door closed; that
is, it's something to be concerned about, but by choosing the devices
appropriately (no 10K Barracudas, or whatever the hot drives are), it
won't be an issue.

I live in a dusty climate, and have more overheating problems with
fan-cooled devices in the open air because of dust buildup. Just an
other maintenance item. The safe tends to be pretty dust-free, since
it's not open much, but there is a bit of lint from the liners and
soft gun cases. Not enough to matter, so far.

>> It will work the same, though, as all
>> you need is to keep the inside a few degrees warmer than the outside
>> so you don't get condensation. All bets are off if you store
>> something moist inside the safe!
>>
>> You wouldn't want to put a PC or a hot-running HD inside, but
>> lower-power devices should be OK.
>
>So where do you find a "cool running HD"? There's nothing magic about the
>ones in NAS, they're the same ones you buy at CompUSA.

As I'm sure you know, some drives run cooler than others, and some
cases run cooler than others. I have no doubt some NAS devices also
run cooler than others.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
March 1, 2005 1:13:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:20:43 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

>I suspect that he's talking about its standalone restore disk.

Yes, I'm afraid I wasn't being very specific. Wireless support is
fine from XP, but not from the boot CD, which is when I need quick and
troublefree interfaces.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
Anonymous
a b G Storage
March 25, 2005 6:43:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:41:05 GMT, "Aloke Prasad"
<aprasad123@columbus.rr.invalid> wrote:

>
>"Neil Maxwell" <neil.maxwell@intel.com> wrote in message
>news:if5s11tpto0a6dh80uimu4lkha9ast2cr7@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:05:03 -0800, Ken K <psnw@RE-MOV-Ethekrones.com>
>> wrote:
>
>What do you think of Maxtor Network Storage?
>
>http://www.maxtor.com/_files/maxtor/en_us/documentation...

There's some data starting to show up out there on the new Maxtors
network drives. They've got a few things I don't care for:

- The USB ports on it are for attaching peripherals only (printer or
extra hard drives), and can't be used to connect the drive directly to
a PC.

- External USB drives connected to it can only be FAT32 format if you
want to be able to write to them. NTFS drives will be read-only. It
appears the Maxtor's internal drive is also formatted as FAT32, but I
can't find it called out in their docs anywhere.

- If you're planning on connecting a printer, multi-function devices
won't work with it.


--
Neil Maxwell - I don't speak for my employer
!