FreeNAS anyone?
 

I'm thinking of building a simple NAS for my network, mainly for backups.

Has anyone used FreeNAS? Anyone have other recommendations?

[QUOTE=Prime95;547104]I'm thinking of building a simple NAS for my network, mainly for backups.

Has anyone used FreeNAS? Anyone have other recommendations?[/QUOTE]I don't run a NAS per se so you may wish to discount the following.

I use an elderly but so far extremely reliable dual-core system running Ubuntu 18.04 LTS server. Not only is it a NFS and Samba server, it also runs backuppc for the benefit of the other systems on the house network. Backuppc is very highly recommended. Although I use it primarily with rsync tunneled over ssh, the Windows system shares its drive with the server which then back it up as if it were a local disk --- using rsync of course. Backuppc can also use SMB directly as well as tar-over-ssh. The backups themselves are held on a four-disk ZFS array for performance, reliability and availability.

The box is also a local DNS server, a NTP server and a print server, all of which it handles efficiently and without any fuss.

FreeNAS would be my first choice although I haven't pulled the trigger yet to find out first hand. Meant to be slightly more finicky to setup than unraid but that could be outdated hearsay. Unraid is meant to be good but it's proprietary which is a dealbreaker.

[QUOTE=M344587487;547131]Meant to be slightly more finicky to setup than unraid but that could be outdated hearsay. Unraid is meant to be good but it's proprietary which is a dealbreaker.[/QUOTE]RAID isn't a backup solution anyway, so unraid won't help here.

I also don't view NAS as a backup solution in most cases either. Backups have to be separate, and multiplexed. If the latest ransomware comes along and trashes all your always connected backup drives, then what?

[URL="https://www.openmediavault.org/"]OpenMediaVault[/URL] (OMV) is flexible in that you can install it on a r-pi (or similar). A r-pi with 4x 13TB disks should meet your needs!

[QUOTE=retina;547132]then what?[/QUOTE]
Then what is your threat model?

Your threat model appears to regard ransomware as sufficiently important that you are willing to spend resources to make your system more resilient against that particular threat. Not everyone has the same threat model as you.

Sadly, many people barely have a threat model at all, not having thought about the matter deeply enough.

A further common point of confusion: resilience to hardware failure vs backup vs archive. I like to have all three, hence ZFS, daily backups cycled weekly, weekly backups cycled monthly, monthly backups kept "forever" as an archive.

[QUOTE=xilman;547137]Your threat model appears to regard ransomware as sufficiently important that you are willing to spend resources to make your system more resilient against that particular threat. Not everyone has the same threat model as you.[/QUOTE]Ransomware is just an example. It could be an OS hiccup in the FS driver, or ordinary malware deleting things, or even just a simple user error typing "rm -rf /NAS/$SomeOldJunk" and discovering too late that $SomeOldJunk was not defined and you just killed the whole setup.

[QUOTE=retina;547138]Ransomware is just an example. It could be an OS hiccup in the FS driver, or ordinary malware deleting things, or even just a simple user error typing "rm -rf /NAS/$SomeOldJunk" and discovering too late that $SomeOldJunk was not defined and you just killed the whole setup.[/QUOTE]Indeed.

In my threat model, the likelihood of someone screwing up on a client system is much greater than the likelihood of the same on the backup server. Clients are used every day, often by people who are tired and/or emotional. Interactive use of the server is rather unusual, it being primarily accessed in a read-only mode.

A nice feature of ZFS is that it is resilient (note I did not say immune) to a good number of failure modes in the disk control software.

Why would you just see raid in the name and not look further. A NAS for live backup and periodic offline backups seems a decent solution for most, and redundant ZFS/BTRFS is not worthless despite what you imply.

[QUOTE=M344587487;547142]... periodic offline backups ...[/QUOTE]:tu: Yes!

Offline, unplugged, rotated. You just never know when a lightning strike will create a power surge and fry everything. No amount of resilient software programming would save you there.

[QUOTE=retina;547143]:tu: Yes!

Offline, unplugged, rotated. You just never know when a lightning strike will create a power surge and fry everything. No amount of resilient software programming would save you there.[/QUOTE]
Or, the transformer across the street could burn up its fuse link and the power company could just hook it back up and physically blow up every power strip and surge suppressor in the house! Yep - been there!

[QUOTE=retina;547143]:tu: Yes!

Offline, unplugged, rotated. [/QUOTE]
You missed 2 more things.

Off site. If I burn down your evil lair, can you restart? If there is a $NATURALDISASTER in your region, can you restart?

Differential media types and connection interfaces. An SSD may have a shorter or longer stability than a burned DVD or platter spinner. Many people with ZIP drives are finding out that they are not so useful anymore. (NASA had to scrounge to find obsolete tape recorders to get back to first generation data.)

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547154]You missed 2 more things.[/QUOTE]Okay, thanks.[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547154]Off site. If I burn down your evil lair, can you restart? If there is a $NATURALDISASTER in your region, can you restart?[/QUOTE]I'm good for this type of problem. Thanks for showing concern for my operations.[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547154]Differential media types and connection interfaces. An SSD may have a shorter or longer stability than a burned DVD or platter spinner. Many people with ZIP drives are finding out that they are not so useful anymore. (NASA had to scrounge to find obsolete tape recorders to get back to first generation data.)[/QUOTE]This is tricky. I just go for regular replacement during the rotation. New media is added and old media is retired.

A homogeneous media type might be susceptible to a class failure. For example: A strong EMP might erase all magnetic media, if they are all stored in close proximity to the source. So geographical separation is useful here, unless one is concerned about a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar#Magnetic_field]magnetar coming within 200,000 km of the Earth[/url].

Some folks use paid "cloud" services for offsite and consider it a different physical format.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547197]Some folks use paid "cloud" services for offsite and consider it a different physical format.[/QUOTE]Indeed. I don't use it but do consider it as such.

However, such usage opens up another can of worms. Information not under your direct control is not under your control. A banal truism perhaps, but it does rather imply that if you can't stop the service provider denying you that service in future. It also implies that the service provider can read, write, delete, copy and re-distribute your data. Crypto can make readability unimportant but it (a) needs care and attention from you, (b) can make modification detectable and (c) does essentially nothing else.

As always, answer the question "what is your threat model" before implementing specific procedures.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547197]Some folks use paid "cloud" services for offsite and consider it a different physical format.[/QUOTE]Those folks need to ask their provider what they use. More likely would be the advantages of physical separation, rather than different media. I would imagine most places that have large data requirements are using magnetic options, either tape or HDD (or both). DVDs are too tiny and/or expensive to be realistic for a "cloud" setup. Same for SSDs I expect. What else is there? Papyrus? One million line printers churning out your backups!

[QUOTE=retina;547209]What else is there?[/QUOTE]
There's a fun way of backing up your genome...

:direction:

Isn't NAS about (controlling) file availability on a network, not a backup solution?

[QUOTE=paulunderwood;547214]Isn't NAS about (controlling) file availability on a network, not a backup solution?[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Prime95;547104]I'm thinking of building a simple NAS for my network, [b]mainly for backups[/b].[/QUOTE]:razz:[QUOTE=retina;547132]I also don't view NAS as a backup solution in most cases either.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=retina;547209] One million line printers churning out your backups![/QUOTE]

What about a series of mercury delay line tubes?

[QUOTE=paulunderwood;547216]What about a series of mercury delay line tubes?[/QUOTE]Stone tablets.

If it was good enough for my great[sup]n[/sup]-grandfather then it should be good enough for me.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;547197]Some folks use paid "cloud" services for offsite and consider it a different physical format.[/QUOTE]
Am I doing it right?

Historically, problems with NAS came from mismatches between the interface programs expect with a local file system and the protocol used to provide remote access.
Reading the development documents for NFS from version 2 onwards, particularly the discussion on idempotent transactions, stateless servers and locking, is instructive.
I haven't looked at this more recently so don't know whether there is now a standard solution to these problems.

Check out rsync. It is a very intelligent program with all sorts of connectivity options, and can keep mounted filesystems backed up.

[QUOTE=retina;547217]Stone tablets.

If it was good enough for my great[sup]n[/sup]-grandfather then it should be good enough for me.[/QUOTE]Don't knock it. It is by far the longest lived information storage technology yet fielded. Surviving petroglyphs long predate papyrus and clay tablets. The latter are much more robust than the former.

I've seen very serious proposals that inscriptions on Pt (by preference, because of its hardness) or Au (it's cheaper but softer and more attractive so more likely to be reused) be used to store information which we would like to last for millennia.

[QUOTE=xilman;547234]...
store information which we would like to last for millennia.[/QUOTE]"Kilroy was here" ?

Jacob

[QUOTE=xilman;547234]... Au (it's cheaper but softer and more attractive so more likely to be reused) be used to store information which we would like to last for millennia.[/QUOTE][url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record[/url]

But the available storage is tiny. And the write times are very long.

[QUOTE=retina;547273][url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record[/url]

But the available storage is tiny. And the write times are very long.[/QUOTE]Special case of the Au/PT decision. It's well away from any pilferers for a significant length of time.

[QUOTE=PhilF;547223]Check out rsync. It is a very intelligent program with all sorts of connectivity options, and can keep mounted filesystems backed up.[/QUOTE]

Yes. I am loving rsync. It only backs up again the files that have changed (based on size and timestamp unless otherwise stated). And it deletes files from the backup set that have been deleted on the master. :smile: