adam1v

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by adam1v

  1. We run BTSync between a number of users and as the person who officially looks after this arrangement I feel it would be greatly beneficial to display the software version of the connected User. When clicking on the "x of x" link (Peers Online), after the Peer name we could easily display the software version next to the name of the user.
  2. Can you try adding read/write permissions to "local Groups" called "Users".
  3. We have exactly the same issue, except you cannot add domain users to the admin group. So no work around for us....
  4. 1, Cloud Station doesnt allow you to sync sub folders, it can only sync the main shares. 2, I didnt think you could connect more than 2 Synology devices together? (we have 3). 3, The BTSync protocol is far superior and faster than the Cloud Station
  5. Has there been any updates towards the user permission replication on NAS devices?
  6. Hi Benerages, theres already two threads about this, both with the same issues. check out the Synology / Qnap threads.
  7. the Synology packages are also suffering from the same issues...
  8. Just to confirm, both the Synology and Qnap packages have exactly the same problem, you can setup and link the devices, share a folder but the files will not transfer. My gut feeling is its probably to do with the user account that runs the package.
  9. Hi Kos, are you suggesting this has been resolved with 2.x?
  10. ​Yet you chose not to replicate file permissions across platforms? So files and folders with strict security permissions are replicated without any permissions what so ever
  11. Hi Richard, Could you confirm how the application handles/replicates file permissions between two Synology NAS devices? I.e does it replicate the permissions on new files the same as the original file (unlike the currently BTSync software).
  12. Has there been any change in policy with regards to file permission replication, i.e when replicating a file from one location to another (particularly when replicating to the same OS) that the file permissions are also mirrored?
  13. Personally Id wait for the SyncoCommunity package, they never seem to be that far behind, maybe a week or 3. In those few weeks you get some security by not running the bleeding edge versions and get to see what issues anyone else is experiencing during this 'beta' period.
  14. I think you would be better posting this on the Synocommunity GitHub page, since the app is packaged by them; https://github.com/SynoCommunity/spksrc/issues
  15. another +1 for wanting to see this official package, but I would rather see the replicated permissions fixed before the official synology app is released.
  16. welcome to the bane of my life right now.... please see: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/31047-qnap-file-permissions-can-not-resolve-using-normal-methods/ http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/31301-btsync-14-on-synology-nas-official-package/ For now, it seems the developers took a conscious decision not to replicate permissions, thus they will replicate your files but prevent you from editing them. I really hope they sort this out as a priority, its hugely detrimental to the software IMO.
  17. AP, it sounds like BTSync is doing an internal check and pointing you towards the website, however on our NAS we are at the mercy of the SynoCommunity, a group not associated with BTSync. We must wait until the SyncoCommunity update their App.
  18. @romanz, Is the NAS group reviewing the permissions issues discussed in the NAS forum, i.e replicating user permissions on newly created files?
  19. I have raised these issues with a number of BTSync developers/moderators and even some were surprised that the (intended) bug exists. I'm amazed that the BTSync software has been developed to intentionally not copy permissions when syncing new files. Surely it's a fundamental flaw that if users cannot open/modify the copied file then there is no point in using this software? Hopefully if enough people voice their concerns it might get addressed?
  20. Hi teoky, Im not familiar with QNAP but I imagine you can telnet in, its probably running some form of unix. Im not overly familiar with SSH commands so I will have to seek further information on running this command.
  21. @Roman, I think this needs to be re-considered for a more permanent solution, you cannot expect NAS owner to have to SSH into their devices and modify user permissions of the running process?
  22. I can try and add the BTSync account on AD, but the account on the NAS associated to BTSync app doesnt logon to active directory, i.e I think its a system account. Looking at the permissions from a windows machine displays; Lastly, how do we unmask? what does this do in simple terms? Sorry im not familliar with linux, but have done a bit of basic with SSH/Telnet.
  23. The problem is, we don't have access to the BTSync app user settings (at UI level), therefore, we cannot add the user account in which the app runs to the same group, otherwise Id create a new group, add the BTSync user to this + all my active directory users and apply that permission at the top level folder. In addition, the folder that contains this file has RW permissions for everyone, its just BTSync that's not applying the RW permissions Any further input you can add is greatly appreciated...
  24. @Tenjaa I have been trying to raise this issue with Synocommunity here: https://github.com/SynoCommunity/spksrc/issues/1243 As an end user, we have very little control over how the package/application is ran, we are not able to select the user account or group it is started with. In your example, if your are using it between NAS devices, BTSync actually takes ownership of the file, using its own account, which appears to be called BTSync, but this is not created by the user, it appears to be a system/unix account created with the app, In my example above, the left side has the original file and the right side has been replicated. No users have write access This might be by design, but surely its quite a big fundamental flaw if users cannot edit or modify the replicated files?
  25. We are testing V1.4 now, but wanted to update with 1.3 incase its an obvious the problem still exists in 1.4. The left side is the original file on the RS3614XS+ and the right side if the newly created file on the DS421+ It seems to have taken permission of the file, and not applied the same file permissions after sync;