[SOLVED] SMBv1 or FTP for file transfer?

[Parroty69]

I have an F600W modem router and I want to plug a usb drive to it and use it as a nas but I can't seem to find out how to turn it on. I have turned on DMS and set library scan method to auto and selected Media source 1 as my usb drive. It appears in the file explorer in the network section but when I click on it, it just goes to the web/index.html
Does anyone know how to use my router as a nas with my usb?

 

[Parroty69]

I have a router which I want to use as a server to transfer files but it has both SMBv1 and FTP and I can't decide which to choose. My purposes are to transfer files between multiple computers for multiple users.
Which one is faster?
Which one is more secure?
Can I store secret important files on them?

 

[kanewolf]

I have a router which I want to use as a server to transfer files but it has both SMBv1 and FTP and I can't decide which to choose. My purposes are to transfer files between multiple computers for multiple users.
Which one is faster?
Which one is more secure?
Can I store secret important files on them?

I wouldn't recommend storing "secret important files" on a USB drive connected to a router. There is probably very little security on the storage. Maybe you can create multiple users to separate access, maybe not. Neither SMBv1 or FTP is very secure. FTP -- without SSL (SFTP) sends login and password information unencrypted. SMBv1 is insecure enough that Microsoft explicitly disabled it Windows 10.
Routers make bad file servers. Routers, and especially old routers, have slow single core CPUs. That is not good for file sharing. Also, NTFS formatted disks are not optimum for a Linux router. You probably don't want to let the router format your disk in a Linux file system, so you will use a PC formatted disk which will slow down performance even more.
If you want secure shared storage, either use an old PC or a commercial NAS unit.

 

[Parroty69]

I wouldn't recommend storing "secret important files" on a USB drive connected to a router. There is probably very little security on the storage. Maybe you can create multiple users to separate access, maybe not. Neither SMBv1 or FTP is very secure. FTP -- without SSL (SFTP) sends login and password information unencrypted. SMBv1 is insecure enough that Microsoft explicitly disabled it Windows 10.
Routers make bad file servers. Routers, and especially old routers, have slow single core CPUs. That is not good for file sharing. Also, NTFS formatted disks are not optimum for a Linux router. You probably don't want to let the router format your disk in a Linux file system, so you will use a PC formatted disk which will slow down performance even more.
If you want secure shared storage, either use an old PC or a commercial NAS unit.

Do you have any suggestions for a device which has a usb port that I can connect a usb drive to and connect to my router to transfer files?

 

[USAFRet]

Do you have any suggestions for a device which has a usb port that I can connect a usb drive to and connect to my router to transfer files?

What is your budget for this?

 

[Parroty69]

What is your budget for this?

$20, cheaper would be better.

 

[USAFRet]

$20, cheaper would be better.

Other than a USB enclosure connected to a PC, and sharing that folder tree to other systems across the network, I can't think of anything remotely near that price point.

And as said above, a router makes a poor solution for this.

 

[Parroty69]

Other than a USB enclosure connected to a PC, and sharing that folder tree to other systems across the network, I can't think of anything remotely near that price point.

And as said above, a router makes a poor solution for this.

I have an different router that does have ssh and a usb port for file sharing, the model of the router is RT-AC1200, should I use this router instead?
It is connected to the router I mentioned earlier using an ethernet cable so how can I use it for usb transfer without connecting anything else?

 

[USAFRet]

I have an different router that does have ssh and a usb port for file sharing, should I use this router instead? It is connected to the router I mentioned earlier using an ethernet cable so how can I use it for usb transfer?

Its still a router with a tiny tiny brain.

 

[Parroty69]

Its still a router with a tiny tiny brain.

The model is RT-AC1200, is tiny brain the of the router capable of doing something useful?

 

[USAFRet]

The model is RT-AC1200, is tiny brain the of the router capable of doing something useful?

It is capable of being a router...

 

[Parroty69]

It is capable of being a router...

I am looking for a router that is a bit more capable than just being a router. This one only supports 100mbps anyway. Do you think a quad core router like the AX-53 would work for me?

 

[kanewolf]

I am looking for a router that is a bit more capable than just being a router. This one only supports 100mbps anyway. Do you think a quad core router like the AX-53 would work for me?

I can't vouch for the validity of the tests, but here is a site that has comparison of routers as storage devices -- https://dongknows.com/best-wi-fi-router-nas-solutions/
The AX53 is not listed, but I would think it is slower than the AX58 which can do about 50MB/s That is reasonable performance. Remember that WIFI performance may not be that good.
According to Asus website the AX53 is a DUAL CORE CPU.

 

[USAFRet]

I am looking for a router that is a bit more capable than just being a router. This one only supports 100mbps anyway. Do you think a quad core router like the AX-53 would work for me?

You're trying to put too many functions in one little box.

While a router has a USB port and can support that as a shared resource, it is suboptimal.
What happens when trying to use your existing router?

From your first post, I see you had 'issues', but did it ever work?

 

[Parroty69]

You're trying to put too many functions in one little box.

While a router has a USB port and can support that as a shared resource, it is suboptimal.
What happens when trying to use your existing router?

From your first post, I see you had 'issues', but did it ever work?

There wasn't issues except for that I couldn't write to the drive when using DMS so I tried using FTP but it was WAY too slow so I decided to quit.

 

[USAFRet]

There wasn't issues except for that I couldn't write to the drive when using DMS so I tried using FTP but it was WAY too slow so I decided to quit.

Did you ever get it mapped as a drive letter in your Windows system(s)?

 

[Parroty69]

Did you ever get it mapped as a drive letter in your Windows system(s)?

Nope. Windows doesn't let you map an FTP server as a drive letter, not to my knowledge. And I couldn't find a way to map a DMS server as a drive letter. Only the SMBv1 server did I have success.

 

[USAFRet]

Nope. Windows doesn't let you map an FTP server as a drive letter, not to my knowledge. And I couldn't find a way to map a DMS server as a drive letter. Only the SMBv1 server did I have success.

And with the SMB connection...how was it?

 

[Parroty69]

And with the SMB connection...how was it?

I didn't check it yet. Hold on a few minutes

 

[Parroty69]

And with the SMB connection...how was it?

Here are the crystaldiskmark results with the usb drive connected directly with the computer:

https://imgur.com/gIFzfYA

View: https://imgur.com/gIFzfYA

Here are the crystaldiskmark results with the usb drive using SMBv1:

https://imgur.com/3SSeAA4

View: https://imgur.com/3SSeAA4

 

[USAFRet]

And that is almost certainly a function of going through the router.

 

[Parroty69]

And that is almost certainly a function of going through the router.

The speed is too slow, maybe I should just give up on trying this.