issue with two users opening the same file

[iwanczuk]

We have begun to experience a problem where two users accessing the same file at the same time are being allowed to do so with full write permission. The result is that two versions of the file appear on the server.

It used to be that if a file was being accessed by one user the second user would be told that the file was available as read-only.

The only thing that has changed is that one of the two users that are seeing this problem is now working remotely using QSYNC. We never saw this problem when the two users were accessing the server via the office network.

Any ideas of how I might be able to achieve the old style of behaviour?

Thanks in adavnce.

[P3R]

The only thing that has changed is that one of the two users that are seeing this problem is now working remotely using QSYNC.

That mean they're effectively working on different files and creating different versions of it, which Qsync then according to configured settings try to synchronize.

Any ideas of how I might be able to achieve the old style of behaviour?

Access the shared folder directly instead of by using Qsync.

[dolbyman]

use a vpn ...exposing any qnap part to the open web is asking for trouble

so forget about qsync(and stop forwarding any ports to the nas) and setup a vpn server (on firewall or dedicated appliance)

[spile]

Context is everything.
Where in this thread is there mention of using QSync (a tool I can recommend as is Freefile sync) in a non-lan environment?

[P3R]

Where in this thread is there mention of using QSync (a tool I can recommend as is Freefile sync) in a non-lan environment?

The only thing that has changed is that one of the two users that are seeing this problem is now working remotely using QSYNC. We never saw this problem when the two users were accessing the server via the office network.

[spile]

Ahh. Good point but the use of a file sync utility such as QSync or FreeFile sync is not inherently unsafe.

[P3R]

Ahh. Good point but the use of a file sync utility such as QSync or FreeFile sync is not inherently unsafe.

No they aren't.

But file sync tools aren't good solutions when there's a risk that users can update the same files concurrently in different locations.

[spile]

Ahh. Good point but the use of a file sync utility such as QSync or FreeFile sync is not inherently unsafe.

No they aren't.

But file sync tools aren't good solutions when there's a risk that users can update the same files concurrently in different locations.

Indeed but that is not the issue I was responding to.

[dolbyman]

Qsync uses port 8080 to connect to the NAS via port forwarding ... never a good idea to forward anything to the NAS directly. And port 8080 is a prime suspect for fingerprinting and subsequent exploit based hacks

[spile]

Qsync uses port 8080 to connect to the NAS via port forwarding ... never a good idea to forward anything to the NAS directly. And port 8080 is a prime suspect for fingerprinting and subsequent exploit based hacks

So rather than ditching a useful sync app, just turn off upnp and manual port forwards then.

[P3R]

So rather than ditching a useful sync app...

Ditching the app that is inappropriate for the use case and that causes the problems that is the topic of this thread seem very appropriate to me.

dolbyman added that any open port forwards had better be closed and that using a remote access VPN solution would be the best. I agree with that as that would also be the only secure way forward to accessing the NAS directly, as was my suggested solution for the OP.

If you disagree with our advice for the OP, then please suggest the solution that you think would help her/him better in the concurrent file usage situation that is the use case here.