Groups > linux.debian.user > #203844

Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size

From	David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size
Date	2019-01-03 04:10 +0100
Message-ID	<xc1yp-6HN-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <xbxh1-4Bs-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <xbFHz-1wb-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <xbQ0h-7Tf-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <xbQ9Y-7WH-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <xbS25-Fl-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed 02 Jan 2019 at 16:54:37 (+0000), Joe wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 15:51:47 +0100 <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
> > Some scanners mail things around, these days. I don't want to even
> > think about how many security holes lurk in there.
> 
> The practical alternatives are to hook the scanner into the SMB sharing
> system, or use sneakernet. Which of those has fewer potential security
> issues? 

Well that depends on what you mean by security. I assume from what you
write below that you're perhaps thinking of the person who scans
sensitive documents onto a USB stick and carries it out of the building.

In my case, the security vulnerability is the sneakernet one: I use a
stick to transfer the scans from the scanner to an encrypted laptop.
A burglar could steal the unsecured stick as part of their swag.

> A company I do some work for is no longer self-sufficient in IT, it is
> part of the company international IT Borg. As such, its PCs are all
> hooked by VPN into a Windows domain, which rules out SMB networking with
> anything non-Borg, and all the USB sockets are disabled. Not, oddly,
> the SD card slots...
> 
> I've just eliminated an old PC there, which existed solely as a SMTP
> server for the scanner. It now uses a Raspberry Pi running (straying
> back on-topic) Raspbian.

My scanner is either one floor up or one down from where I normally
work (attic office, basement kitchen). Wifi scanning directly into the
computer would be a pointless exercise because the documents still
have to be physically loaded onto the scanner bed.

Cheers,
David.

Thread

[OT] scanned files are large in size kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2019-01-01 18:40 +0100
  Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-01 19:50 +0100
    Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Anders Andersson <pipatron@gmail.com> - 2019-01-01 20:00 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2019-01-01 20:30 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-01 20:40 +0100
    Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 04:50 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size tomas@tuxteam.de - 2019-01-02 10:40 +0100
        Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2019-01-02 11:10 +0100
          Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-02 11:30 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 12:10 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Chris Ramsden <chris.ramsden@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 12:10 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-02 12:40 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 20:20 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-02 20:30 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 03:50 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Siard <shiems146@kpnplanet.nl> - 2019-01-03 14:10 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2019-01-03 14:20 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-03 15:20 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Siard <shiems146@kpnplanet.nl> - 2019-01-03 16:00 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2019-01-03 17:30 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-03 17:30 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 21:30 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-02 15:50 +0100
        Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-02 16:00 +0100
          Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 16:20 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-02 16:30 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 17:20 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-01-02 17:40 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-02 20:10 +0100
          Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2019-01-02 16:20 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size tomas@tuxteam.de - 2019-01-02 16:20 +0100
          Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2019-01-02 18:00 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 04:10 +0100
        Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 03:30 +0100
          Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2019-01-03 05:00 +0100
            Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-04 18:30 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-01-04 19:50 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-04 20:50 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-01-04 20:40 +0100
                Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-04 21:00 +0100
              Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-05 03:20 +0100
  Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-01 21:10 +0100
    Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2019-01-02 05:00 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2019-01-02 20:20 +0100
  Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2019-01-02 12:40 +0100
    Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2019-01-03 05:00 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 06:10 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2019-01-03 09:40 +0100
  Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-01-03 14:50 +0100
    Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-01-03 21:50 +0100
      Re: [OT] scanned files are large in size Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-01-04 11:00 +0100

csiph-web