15th TERENA TF-Storage Belnet File Sync & Share Update. Belnet Jean-Philippe Evrard & Mario Vandaele Uppsala 22nd September 2014

Transcription

1 15th TERENA TF-Storage Belnet File Sync & Share Update Belnet Jean-Philippe Evrard & Mario Vandaele Uppsala 22nd September 2014

2 Small PoC with Seafile! What? Open-source file sync & share solution Possibility to go for commercial solution in the cloud 15 th TERENA TF-Storage: Belnet File Sync & Share Update 2

3 Seafile - Conclusions! Positive: Fully on-premise deployable Straightforward & user-friendly front-end Has server SW for Linux & Windows Has client SW for Linux, Windows, MacOSX, ios & Android Open-source, which if you have in-house resources available, avoids public tendering overhead 3

4 Seafile - Conclusions! Negative: Very small development team (ca. 3) without significant community: Continuity risk No fast response to major issues & security holes Security by obscurity policy: Impression that security not a priority Specific security questions on the forum are not answered, disregarded as irrelevant or they are answered in a way which proves they didn t understand the question No API Limited user authentication methods ( , basic LDAP) 4

5 The Gartner Magic Quadrant: Enterprise File Sync & Share 5

6 The Gartner Magic Quadrant: Selection of subset for review! How did we filter? They must be in the leader quadrant or close to it They must offer an on-premise solution! Those which were withheld: Syncplicity by EMC ( ) KiteWorks by Accellion ( ) WatchDox by WatchDox ( ) ShareFile by Citrix ( 6

7 EFS&S Conclusions! Common Positive Characteristics: A polished product: Quality from design to implementation: Rich feature set for file sync and share Transparant about which security mechanisms/processes are used Choice of support levels (basic to 24/7) Mature API s, in case you want to plug in your specific front-end Universal Look&Feel user interface on all supported platforms Deep integration with certain office application, e.g. Outlook plug-in, SharePoint, Office365, GoogleDocs, 7

8 EFS&S Conclusions! Common Negative Characteristics: All are allergic to Linux & Thunderbird, so no Linux desktop integration and no plug-in. Proprietary è Pricing Model based on per User è Public Tender The focus goes further than FS&S: Who has access to which document? What kind of access (view, edit, annotate, download, )? On which device? In which location (Geo IP location)? For how long (document access expiration dates, even offline)? è Strong DRM & Audit Trail Management è Probably too paranoid solutions for the majority of the R&E community 8

9 EFS&S Conclusions! Specific Negative Characteristics for Sharefile (Citrix) & Syncplicity (EMC): Allthough the solution can be deployed on-premise, it is mandatory that the access control & orchestration plane, the brain, resides in the cloud, thus still owned & controlled by the vendor è Booh! L 9

10 General Conclusions! Belnet wants to deploy a FS&S service which fits the core needs of a majority of the R&E community and also deploy it at the right scale! More time and effort must to be put in collecting the end-user requirements: End-user online surveys Advisory boards è Collaborate with Customer Relations & MarCom departments to get user requirements & required size è Collaborate with other NREN for finding the right technology to build or buy 10

11 Q&A 11