I can't imagine putting anything up there from the perspective of enterprise. Too much at risk for too little protection. Can you imagine losing all of your confidential data to a competitor? Or all of your financial files stolen? Or having your copyrighted data taken from the site that you stored it on, and having someon else use it before you could register it, and their proof could modify the date you stored it, thus obviating the date of storage being proof you created/uploaded it.
For my money, I'm not willing to put anything exclusive on the web, and secure data lives on hard drives not shared to the network anyway. We all know business is competitive, moreover I think access and anonymity tempt folks that don't have reasonable morals or ethics to want to access or attempt to access your media. Why provide unnecessary temptation?

In these days, how could you even think to trust the security of that data? Even secure sites are being breeched.

JJK

It is reasonable to have different levels of security for different levels of data.

I have my company financial data and much IP in development backed up every night to two separate geographic locations via a commercial online service that serves also some the largest companies in the U.S. The data is encrypted with a very long key, and the service company doesn't have the key, so even if somebody broke into their servers, they would get zippo. I still have to protect my company networks, but that protection has been successful for a decade so far. There is always a risk, but I have done the best I can.

That service is not suited for large media files (it's too slow for that), but it's ideal for even a large quantity of smaller files that are updated incrementally, because only the changes are transmitted.

Could there be data I wouldn't trust even to this service? Not for me currently, but if it was state secrets I would of course do something different. And it won't be what the Department of Homeland Security does....

Any web mail access presents some risk for break-ins. If this is unacceptable, don't even have it enabled (it doesn't matter so much whether you use it or not, it's whether it is possible to access it).

The use of a gmail account as an external data drive has been done for a long time, and it would be a separate account with no additional risk if it's used to store a client review file for example.

And don't use hotmail for anything, that has been broken enough times with very very simple means.

I was thinking it would be beneficial for storing raw footage or complete wedding files stored as .iso files that you could make available to your client(s) to download for backup purposes. I see a lot of potential for things like this, but yeah, common-sense would tell you that anything that could undermine your interests should not be stored online.

j razz

>You could always store up to 2GB of files in your Google gmail area, using a freeware app.

10MB per file, max. That's a bit of a hassle for us video guys :-)

There is a way around the 10mb file limit as you would use a third party utility to upload your files.

j razz

>There is a way around the 10mb file limit as you would use a third party utility to upload your files.

I can use winrar to zip the files into 10mb segments, but that is a hassle. I use gmail, which is terrific (until google releases its own tool shortly), but does not solve the 10mb limitation. Are you talking about some other tool?