On Fri, 24 Nov 2017 21:44:56 -0500 Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > NFS is a very old protocol that very likely has as yet undiscovered > vulnerabilities. I would expect that the likelihood of there being > even a theoretical vulnerability that would allow a malicous user on > the server to gain access to a client would be very low.
Ok. I wasn't sure because it seems rather complex with all this RPC stuff. > However, I think you are going about this all wrong. A backup script > or program would have to touch/examine every file to determine its > age, MD5 sum, or whatever other feature drives the backup/no-backup > decision. NFS is actually a terrible protocol for this sort of thing. Ok, [1] for example says it's factor two compared to iSCSI. > That is likely to be more secure and I can practically guarantee it > will have better performance. That's probably better. I was thinking about NFS because I don't have enough disks on the backup server. Those files should go to tape. Thank you for your quick reply! - Chris [1] https://www.usenix.org/legacy/publications/library/proceedings/fast04/tech/full_papers/radkov/radkov_html/head.html