>>907629
Be sure to pick a HD that can handle running for extended periods. Some (the LaCie "Designed by Porsche" drives being a good example) run so hot the drive dies after a few months.

I used to tunnel mt-daapd over SSH so I could listen to my music at work, at it worked great. I set up a dyndns service on the server so I could find it from anywhere, and used public key authentication to log in. Just make sure you keep up to date on security patches and there shouldn't be any problems. Also, >>>/g/.

File: wd mycloud.jpg (47 KB, 532x339) Image search: [Google]

47 KB, 532x339

no, dude, you just get a networked external HDD, like the Western Digital MyCloud series. you hook it up to your router so you can access it from anywhere using wired or wireless connections.

you can also access it remotely, through the interbutts, though i would not put any sensitive data in there if i enable this feature.

>>907658
I'd rather get a nice DD-WRT router with a usb3 port and plug in a usb-3 hdd. I feel like I'd have better access control and up time. I am a contrarian and hate buying nice pre made solutions because they always feel like they are full of bloat ware, especially hard drives.

>>907629
And yeah, pretty shitty. The boards usually don't have much ram or processor. Networked HDDs can be pretty significant load. They also have power supply issues where they suck at providing power over their usb port and might undervolt their processor and cause errors if it's pegging the processor, usb, and ethernet port at the same time.

>>907667

An FTP server wouldn't be very resource intensive especially if it was just for one person. As far as power, he would need to get one with it's own power supply like he posted.

The problem with using a RiPi (specifically) for a file server is that both the hard drive and the ethernet both go through the same USB hub. I/O from the hard-drive and then back out the ethernet adaptor is slow.

If you want a cheap NAS wait for a cashback deal on an HP MicroServer.

>>907797

It's slow but so is the upload on most residential connections so it shouldn't really be an issue.

>>907800
If you want to use it over the internet then yeah, it won't matter much. Using it inside your own house over a LAN will be painful though.

>>907667
My old NAS has a 400MHz ARM9 CPU. It can be a bit sluggish accessing large folders, but it has no problems saturating a gigabit connection for large files.

>>907832
OP specifically said
>Now you can access your files from anywhere with an internet connection.
Tunnelling the data over SSH would be pointless on your home LAN.

>>907797
>>907800
>have rpi file server
>samba file transfers are around 6-8mbps

>>907797
I live in third world and RiPi is kinda expensive. Are the clones that I can get from Aliexpress any good?

I wouldn't have a problem with what you said because I'm interested in serving a password database to all my devices so I can use Keepass, and that is a few kb in size, at max.

>>907843
In addition, I was checking this
http://system-dot-out.tumblr.com/post/57632985127/setting-up-a-build-server-for-owncloud-android

And I could get a cheap used smartphone to make my server. It even has the added bonus of battery in case of power off. What do you think?

>>907843
Can't it synchronize using Dropbox or some other cloud service? They will have more reliable connectivity.

>>907848
I could, but I don't trust it. I was checking services that I could trust (zero knowledge, encrypted), and the only one acceptable is SpiderOak, but that's a cost I would rather not have.

I know I might look like a cheapskate, but I'm trying to find the cheapest solution to my problem.

>>907853
You don't need to trust the cloud service, only Keepass' database encryption.

>>907854
That's a fair point.

synology makes excellent network attached storage solutions. they are mid range price, but the software and nice UI is totally worth it IMO

there is also a large community that maintains a custom app repository. mostly niche stuff, but worth looking at

>>907836
>Now you can access your files from anywhere with an internet connection.

Sure, but he has to get the data on there somehow. Which, based on empirical evidence (everyone does it), would imply he wants to access it from home too. In fact it'd be fucking weird to have a NAS at home that you never use from your own home.

>>907843
>>907854
This. Just store the Keypass database in Dropbox; it doesn't matter at all if you trust Dropbox because the Keypass database is encrypted. If you think you can make a secure home server but don't trust Dropbox, you're probably wrong.

>>907853
Mega gives 50 gb.

I highly doubt that your home brew security will be in any way comparable to theirs, no matter how unsecured theirs is.

If your stuff is that sensitive (and it's not, brony) then don't have it connected to the interest. At all.

>>907868
If the main use is to provide remote access, a really fast setup is probably overkill. And if it's using an external HD, you can just plug it directly into your computer if you have to copy large amounts of data.

>>907871
If the only open port is SSH, and you're using public key authentication, you're pretty safe.

>>907836
>Tunnelling the data over SSH would be pointless on your home LAN.
You'd use something like OpenVPN or encrypted NFS or directly-mounted SFTP.

The advantage would be that the same configuration works all the time, whether you're on your home LAN or not.

>>907868
> because the Keypass database is encrypted
now, it is.

What if an exploit is found? Or if we get to quantum computers? It won't matter that they don't have the password.

>>907871
While Dropbox is a known PRISM contributor, Mega is known to have been under control of the NZ government (said by Kim himself) which is the lapdog of the US gov.

I'm not saying that my solution is 100% secure, but unless I can trust the service (like SpiderOak), and it can provide a cheaper or free option to such a small amount of storage, then I'm better off doing it by myself.

Thanks for the replies so far, critical of what I'm trying to do or not.

>>907927
>What if an exploit is found? Or if we get to quantum computers? It won't matter that they don't have the password.

It won't matter anyway, because the passwords in your password database will be toast too.

>>907936
That's true. If I don't find a cheap solution I'll have to stick with one of them, I guess.

>>907839
Wow, that's horrible.

>>907927
I don't know how Keepass encrypts its database, but there are algorithms that are secure against quantum computers.

>>907975
I thought quantum computers were fiction

>>908113
Some experimental shit machines are known to exist. If actual, usable machines capable of cracking the RSA exist, they're top secret and unlikely to be used on anon's CP collection. Not that it stops anon from worrying.

>>908133
> anon's CP collection
hardly. Believe it or not, it's just regular passwords. I just hate having my info in the hands of the NSA.

>>908134
If you're that worried about the NSA snooping your shit with supposedly impossible methods, you shouldn't keep it in a place where they have a non-zero chance of accessing it.
Or use any of those passwords on any internet-connected machines.

>>908113
Research machines exist, but we know how they work and what they can do. They're not magic solve-all machine like in the movies, so we can design algorithms resistant to quantum computers. For example, public key cryptography is considered broken, but doubling the key size should be enough to keep symmetric crypto safe.

>>907629
Is that your actual HDD? I had one of those and it was crap. It had a Seagate inside (not the first Seagate to die on me suddenly either).

>>908256
>Research machines exist, but we know how they work and what they can do. They're not magic solve-all machine like in the movies.

Really we don't. We know what we call them, and we know what the current state-of-the-art can do.

A non-deterministic Turing machine can literally solve any problem that can be expressed as "answer=f(known, unknown)", by trying every possible unknown at once and accepting the one that gives the answer. Which is to say that it can solve NP in P, because that's how NP is defined.

All our current encryption algorithms are in NP if you don't know the key, and P if you do.

So as for quantum computers and cryptography, there are really two questions you need answered:

"is *this* quantum computer equivalent to an ND turing machine"
For which the answer currently is "no"

and

"is it *impossible* to create a quantum computer equivalent to an ND turing machine"
Which currently remains unanswered.

http://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/2718/what-is-the-difference-between-quantum-tm-and-nondetermistic-tm

If I wanted good and somewhat compact file server I would use off-the-shelf branded serrver spare parts such as:
HP 4 to 12x3.5" drive cages, they cost just $30 something, SAS expander backplanes are available, but they do not work well with SATA drives without interposer.
Half-width dual-socket motherboards such as from Dell C6100/Supermicro Twin/HP s390 etc perfectly fit those cages lengthxwidth-wise, so it is possible to attach the motherboard to top/bottom of the cage with standoffs.
Long x narrow 12V server power supplies attached to the other side of the disk cage and small server power distribution board to get 3V and 5V required by backplane.
Then I would probably dip the boards in thermal-conductive rubber compound, lay copper tubes everywhere (probably pouring extra Wood's alloy around them for more contact area) and cool whole thing with liquid cooling system.

>>908514

Shut the fuck up.

It's not a bad idea, as long as you understand the limitations. I have some cast off iomega NAS boxes that have radically lower specs than even the cheapest current SBC. I think about 270 mhz MIPS processor, with 16MB of RAM, and 32MB of flash. The slowest raspberry pi flys past this computationally, _but_ this has onboard SATA, so it's bit pushing everything over the USB bus. Any contemporary SBC with a SATA port will work just fine. As an added bonus, SMART monitoring always works over SATA.

>>908947
SMART not working is a limitation of the host and the software, not the USB bridge.

On Windows you'll struggle, but smartctl works just fine.

Look at Synology and QNAP systems... They generally support SATA drives in RAID configuration, which you're not going to get from a Raspberry Pi style single board computer.

>>908951
>SMART not working is a limitation of the host and the software, not the USB bridge.

Not really; the bridge has to support something like SAT so that the software can send ATA SMART commands to the drive. If the bridge doesn't support SAT or some other raw-ATA-command mechanism that smartmontools understands, it'll never work.

https://www.smartmontools.org/wiki/FAQ#SmartmontoolsforFireWireUSBandSATAdiskssystems

>>907658

Synology makes fantastic devices.

As for Op's question. The main issue with Pis for a NAS is that the USB and Network share a bus, so transfer rates will be abysmal since its reading off the drive and pushing to and from the network on the same.bus.

>>908977
Yeah, but they all do, because it's a prerequisite for ATAPI.

>>908983
>it's a prerequisite for ATAPI

Maybe for ATAPI over USB, but not all adaptors support that.

(Just as an aside, as this point we're in the bizarre situation of using SAT to emulate an ATA controller to support ATAPI which is just a way to send SCSI commands over ATA...even though the USB Mass Storage spec. uses SCSI commands natively. We have SCSI-ception)

>>908980
If you read the thread, the speed is fine for the intended use. There are also plenty of other cheap Linux boards (Odroid etc.)