NAS

Moderators
  • Posts

    5022
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by NAS

  1. Thank you. Even after mounting countless hundreds of disk using UD I was not aware of those settings in the GUI at all. Perhaps that hints at either PEBCAK or an area where interface changes would help. As for image work, I cited that specific example as it was easy to do using the wiki itself but other examples include the more mundane tasks of backing up disks, thumb drives, RPI SD cards etc but I accept that these examples whilst not disk recovery are still intended more for the sysop than the average user. Thank you for the education and consideration.
  2. Nothing especially complicated I am just suggesting that disks should only be mounted RW if you actually need RW. Failing that an option that allows you chose RO. For example if you are loading data from a backup then RO would be a safer option especially in the scenario where you are needing to restore from backup in the first place. As for working with images this gives a practical example of a use case https://wiki.unraid.net/Manual/Troubleshooting#Using_ddrescue_to_recover_data_from_a_failing_disk
  3. Any thoughts on this? If image options are out of scope please consider the read only mount option. There is a lot to be said to mounting disks RO by default with an option to seamlessly remount RW if needed.
  4. Not a VM thing just a normal raw imaging action such as: `dd if=/dev/sdX of=/mnt/mybackup.img` or in reverse `dd if=mnt/mybackup.img of=/dev/sdX` There are many other options such as compressed images, partition images etc but all are just variations on the theme of disk image handling.
  5. Apologies if this is covered in the previous 252 pages but has consideration been given to adding the ability to mount and/or create disk/partition images (typically using dd in the background) Perhaps niche but genuinely useful especially if RO mode is an option.
  6. Suggestion for Update Assistant part of Fix Common Problems. Check all users for any instances of screen running.
  7. This clearly falls within the bounds of the release methodology. I appreciate the conflicting pressures and associated costs but its time, 332 days between security releases is pushing it a bit.
  8. I was indeed agreeing. Just for clarity the normal security reporting methodology is to start with private contact. Normally this is for unpublished vulnerabilities but it holds equally true for published ones where the vendor may just not have noticed or has noticed and something has went wrong and they wrongly assume fixes are in place. It is VERY common for vendors to patch, release but not pen test the actual release after. After a reasonable period of time if unresolved you can and should then post publicly so that users who are vulnerable have the maximum chance to hear about it and make and informed decision on what the risk is to them and how to handle it. I dont think it would be unfair to say no one in the history of this project has prodded more about security then me. I am not and never have been an employee of Limetech LLC and have never received any monetary of gift rewards other than a single license for testing.
  9. Do not open 445 to the internet.
  10. It is important that users who choose a non subscription model, even if that is just implicit by the fact they use only the traditional unRAID product, that there be no phone home or other services that reach out of the system by lieu of the subscription services running in "off" mode of or any other mechanism. I cannot stress this enough. Feel free to add value in whatever way suits your business but dont break that trust model whilst doing so.
  11. Whilst it is not ideal that the poster did not follow normal security reporting etiquette it is clear there is an issue and it is off our own making. See versus http://www.slackware.com/security/list.php?l=slackware-security&y=2020 tl;dr we are long overdue an update but we have slipped into the old habit of waiting for the development branch to be ready and ignoring the stable branch. It is not the end of the world but its a habit we need to break again ASAP
  12. @unRate can you post a few representative examples to set context. Nothing should be `fixed over a year ago` but 280-290 days is unfortunately possible.
  13. This is a very interesting poll and I commend the people responsible. I do however question why `SSD Array option with Trim support` is on this poll though. The other items in the poll are feature enhancements, nice to haves or power user edge cases..... but supporting SSDs in 2020 should be a basic capability for a NAS not something we poll to see if its optionally wanted.
  14. NAS

    Better Defaults

    This is a pretty big deal if it is true. I wouldnt know how to pull this off right now though so more details required.
  15. I think I can actually replicate this now. If i mount a USB drive and copy files continuously to my SSD cache drive which also is the location of my docker loopback image then after a few minutes docker starts to not respond which obviously ruins the web GUI as well. I routinely copied files in this way in all previous versions and the cache drive seems fine (its pretty new) and there are no errors in any log that I can see. The SSD is attached to a motherboard SATA port directly. I am pretty sure it is IO WAIT as load sky rockets. Will wait and see if its an "only me" problem.
  16. Except if you a company or any public body or a registered non profit or anyone with liability cover or any organization that has to comply is ISO accreditation or worldwide equivs or has independent audits or anyone covered by EU GDPR or or.... context is import and whilst most people here are home users plenty unRAID users are not Nice addon. I really mean that. It absolutely has its place but the default advice should always be "be secure unless you really really understand the risks of not being".
  17. yeah i dont think it is there either but i suspect this thread will hang about for years and hit first page on google since its so niche. (anyone else find themselves answering their own question via google in old forum posts... i do more than I care to admit)
  18. I faced an odd issue where the web gui would load but not completely. Specifically the dash wouldnt load but disk view would excluding the action buttons at the bottom. Docker view wouldnt load at all but settings would. Dockers containers did not work or were super slow (hard to say) Manually restarting one container instantly kicked web gui and docker into a working state. I cant replicate.
  19. @limetech can you confirm if this is indeed in `proc` just so I can close this thread down as solved and anyone else that happens upon it knows the definitive answer.
  20. hehe Out of curiusoty i never did find a way to do this by query /proc. Any idea if this data is in there somewhere?
  21. That is excellent thank you very much. I would not have thought to do it like this at all.
  22. I have tried I think all the obvious ways although I still think i missed the one obvious one that works lsblk /dev/md4 NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT md4 9:4 0 3.7T 0 md /mnt/disk4
  23. Sorry if this is obvious but I cant quite nail it down. I have a need for a thing I am doing to find the device name and disk serial starting knowing either "/mnt/disk4" or "/dev/md4" from the shell Does anyone know how to get for example "/dev/sdb1" from this?
  24. I thought I was going mad. This is most certainly a thing.
  25. tl;dr to fully fix this Intel garbage users are going to pay a performance price. The price varies wildly based on user workloads and is basically impossible to predict however I have been in conversation where some devops have seen insane edge cases performance drops. I would suggest the right way to do this is to fix it by default but document an opt out for those that want to accept the risk because it is not possible for normal humans to really understand this beginning to end.