The Pitfalls of Online File Sharing and Sending Services


Mike Nash TV-Bay Magazine
Read ezine online
Download PDF
Download PDF

Easy-to-use, readily-accessible, and consumer-oriented, online file sharing platforms such as Dropbox and Google Drive are, to end users, a pleasant replacement to older file transfer methods such as FTP. FTP is complex to use and requires IT intervention to make almost any change. The pain associated with FTP, which was developed in the 1970s, is one of the factors that opened the door for the rise of online file sharing services in the workplace.

Along with file sharing, for the sending large files, a series of consumer-focused tools have emerged such as WeTransfer to navigate around the size limitations of most email systems. Given the consumer-adoption of such tools, it’s no wonder so many business users are willing to circumvent internal IT systems and use file sending services when they need to send a large file to co-workers, partners or customers.

These trends, of course, make IT managers nervous (especially every time major online file sharing data breaches get publicized). Because now that users are self-migrating from FTP or internal email systems to unsanctioned, public platforms, leaving IT out of the loop - they open their companies to risks and challenges that companies can’t afford to take.

In some cases, EFSS (Enterprise File Sync and Share) systems including Box and Dropbox for Business are options for IT organizations to consider. These typically take a consumer-like offering and add additional management controls and, in some cases, more sophisticated security. EFSS solutions are widely deployed, and they are often considered a good choice for business documents. However, when it comes to sending and sharing mission-critical content or massive video files, such EFSS systems aren’t the best solution either.

Online file sharing and sending (OFSS) services are great for consumers and even for some simple business use cases there’s no denying that. But when it comes to mission-critical content and the complex workflows of modern M&E companies, these services just aren’t up to the challenge.

Seven pitfalls of OFSS services for M&E companies

  • No Acceleration

For all the promises of ease, access and user-friendliness of OFSS services, they fail to address the biggest bottleneck of all in moving large video files to other users: the transfer speed.

While employees might think they’re circumventing the annoying FTP process, they’re still left waiting for transfers to complete. Why? Because OFSS services still rely on traditional TCP transfers that don’t maximize network bandwidth. They are just as slow as FTP, but with a friendlier face.

  • Flawed Security Models

Even if a company advertises that files are encrypted in storage, you have no assurance whether your OFSS provider is following secure design principles. And, let’s say you get the information and your OFSS service is following secure design principles, is your company’s intellectual property and PII (Personally Identifiable Information) data now sitting in someone else’s storage?

Just by using an OFSS service, you could be violating your company’s security policies with respect to PII. Freemium versions of the majority of these products seldom support critical security controls.

  • Storage Lock-in

You can’t choose where you want your assets stored. OFSS services use their own storage - and that could be anywhere. This means your IT department has no control over the actual server where assets are stored.

  • Closed Storage System

Additionally, because you have no control of where the content is stored, you cannot access this storage via other mechanisms. It may be impossible for you to directly interact with your stored files or move your files through an automated workflow that is outside or adjacent to your OFSS storage.

  • File Size Limits

As of July 2017, Dropbox has a file size limit of 20GB per file. That may seem like a lot but with today’s 4K cameras, you could exceed that limit quickly depending on FPS (frames per second), bitrate and codec.

  • Poor Control and Visibility

Without direct ownership of or access to the storage and server management, using an OFSS service introduces a dangerous barrier to corporate visibility. Being able to restrict access and assign granular permissions to files ensures that only the right people have access to the content. And, being able to view, track and audit activities means that if a breach occurs you can pinpoint its source.

  • No Robust Transfer Mechanisms

Even if you decide that OFS meets all your needs, you can’t afford to waste time starting at the beginning. With large files, a Checkpoint Restart function becomes very important. If a file transfer is interrupted due to internet connectivity or other network challenges, having to manually restart or worse having to start the transfer over from the beginning can be a nightmare in meeting deadlines especially when there’s no file acceleration.

A solution

The answer is to make the move to a next-generation file transfer solution like Signiant Media Shuttle. Media Shuttle is an easy and highly reliable way to transfer large files fast. More than 25,000 companies of all sizes use the solution and enjoy the enterprise security features and flexibility and control of choosing their own storage.

About Signiant Media Shuttle
Signiant Media Shuttle is the fastest, easiest, and most reliable way for users to send and share large files. Used by hundreds of thousands of media professionals around the world, this cloud-native SaaS solution employs Signiant's patented acceleration technology to dramatically speed up transfers over public and private IP networks. Authorized users can log in to Media Shuttle's branded portals from any Web browser, gaining secure access to content via a super-simple user interface. Behind the scenes, the system can be configured to work with either local storage or cloud storage. Sold by subscription to businesses large and small, Media Shuttle is the de facto standard for person-initiated transfer of large files. For more information, please visit www.signiant.com/media-shuttle.


Tags: iss131 | ftp | signiant | efss | dropbox | google drive | ftp | ofss | media shuttle | Mike Nash
Contributing Author Mike Nash

Read this article in the tv-bay digital magazine
Download PDF
Article Copyright tv-bay limited. All trademarks recognised.
Reproduction of the content strictly prohibited without written consent.

Related Interviews
  • JVC GY-HM650 upgrade at NAB 2013

    JVC GY-HM650 upgrade at NAB 2013

  • File Catalyst at NAB 2013

    File Catalyst at NAB 2013

  • Signiant at IBC2011

    Signiant at IBC2011


Articles
Original KVM or KVM over IP
Jochen Bauer Will the technology used in broadcasting solely consist of IP devices? For years, IP has been entering all areas of life. Especially control room applications as they are typically deployed in broadcasting benefit from the IP revolution in many ways. But an “IP-only broadcast world” is not yet here. Nevertheless, the trend clearly moves towards IP transmission, even though a large part of content production still uses traditional transmission paths. And therefore we continue to live in a hybrid world, using both original and IP-based technology. KVM experts Guntermann und Drunck still rely on both original KVM and KVM-over-IP™ to be able to offer their customers the best of both worlds.
Tags: iss139 | kvm | gdsys | guntermann and drunck | kvm-over-ip | Jochen Bauer
Contributing Author Jochen Bauer Click to read or download PDF
Keeping the Show on the Road
Andy McKenzie There is long-established saying in the media business that, if something goes wrong, at least nobody dies. It is almost true unless you happen to be a TV producer suffering a cardiac arrest because your primary video feed has gone blank during a high-budget programme.
Tags: iss139 | service | support | finepoint | maintenance | Andy McKenzie
Contributing Author Andy McKenzie Click to read or download PDF
Why MADI is Still Relevant
Stephen Brownsill While the original idea for MADI was to cater to a very narrow recording studio application, the standard remains a viable go-to multichannel audio technology. Beginning as a standard in 1991, MADI was first introduced to the world as digital production was beginning to come of age. MADI was put together in 1988 by Solid State Logic, AMS-Neve, Sony (DASH) and Mitsubishi (ProDigi) as a way to transport up to 56 channels of digital audio between large-format audio consoles of the day and digital multi-channel tape machines via 75-Ohm coaxial cables. Both tape-based machines have long since disappeared from the equipment landscape.
Tags: iss139 | madi | tsl products | aes10 | aes | dolby atmos | st-2110 | sam-q | Stephen Brownsill
Contributing Author Stephen Brownsill Click to read or download PDF
The Future of Broadcast Connectivity
Jamie Adkin The use of KVM equipment has been essential to meet the evolving needs of the broadcast industry for many years. Over that time, many in the industry have recognised the importance of using IP-enabled KVM to break down technological barriers and enable real-time access to visuals wherever and whenever they’re needed. These components are vital parts in live production environments in particular.
Tags: iss139 | adder | kvm | ip kvm | Jamie Adkin
Contributing Author Jamie Adkin Click to read or download PDF
Keeping Pace with the Content Revolution
Kevin Fitzgerald These are uniquely challenging times for broadcasters and their technical teams. Not only are they having to negotiate the move to IP-based infrastructures and the introduction of new formats and techniques such as 4K and HDR, they are also having to generate more content than ever before to support OTT and web services as well as traditional linear broadcast.
Tags: iss139 | streamstar | streaming | case 800 | ipx | ipx-3g | Kevin Fitzgerald
Contributing Author Kevin Fitzgerald Click to read or download PDF