Investigating the Possibility of Scanning UNIX Network Attached Storage Drives (NAS) -- File Type nfs

[bruce_giles]

Hi Everyone, now before someone "roasts" me for even thinking of doing this, I know that scanning Network Drives is a HUGE NO NO and by default, this is not possible. I agreed that I would at least investigate it, before offering an answer of  no chance lol.

I will give you as much details as I have about the scenario I find myself in ... this relates to Linux Servers

Turns out some software has been installed on Network Attached Storage (NAS) drives which use the file system of  "nfs". These servers are used for Development but still need the licensing to be captured for this specific software. The install path is the same on all servers, but again, they use the NAS drives.

As we know, by "default" the  IncludeFileSystemType=ufs,zfs,lofs  only scans for these file types, excluding nfs which represents the majority of any Network Drives, which makes perfect sense since 99.999% of the time one would not include Network drives. Best practice's would dictate to install any software on Local drives and use Network drives for data etc.

So, I am investigating if there is any way of accomplishing this, using combinations of the Include Directory, IncludeFile SystemType. I have been looking at the details in the "GatheringFlexnetInventory" documentation regarding these 2 fields but I do not see any method of doing this without using a HUGE number of Include Directory paths for UNIX which would be a big challenge to obtain. I could edit the config.in file on each server to include the following statement of  IncludeFileSystemType=ufs,zfs,lofs,nfs which would trigger the scanning of the NAS drives, but this would scan everything and cause huge impacts, I only need to scan 1 directory path on the NAS drives but I can not simply edit the IncludeDirectory field in the config.ini on each server, as that portion gets overwritten by policy where as the  IncludeFile SystemType does not.

I don't think it is possible without creating a massive Include Directory list but wanted to throw it out to the experts .. here is my current setup with respect to include exclude etc.

The Ask is to scan 1 Directory path on Network/NAS Drives,  which uses the file system of nfs

Current GUI Settings are the following

Include File Evidence - all 3 areas are set to "Collect File Evidence for All Drives"

Exclude File Evidence - 2 out of 3 areas have exclusion paths identified

No Individual servers config.ini files have any edits from the default , meaning that nothing has been added like 

IncludeFileSystemType=  etc.

Thanks in Advance  (Sorry for the length of the post but wanted to provide the Big Picture)

Bruce

[ChrisG]

If I'm following right, I think you are seeking to scan:

1. All directories on ufs, zfs and lofs filesystems.
2. A known directory (or a small number of known directories) on nfs filesystems.

Is that right?

Interesting challenge! I'm trying to think of some way to make use of the IncludeFileSystemType, IncludeDirectory and ExcludeDirectory preferences to achieve this, but not coming up with any simple ideas at the moment. I wonder if anybody else can think of an approach.

[bruce_giles]

If I'm following right, I think you are seeking to scan:

1. All directories on ufs, zfs and lofs filesystems.
2. A known directory (or a small number of known directories) on nfs filesystems.

Is that right?

Hi Chris, that is exactly what the challenge is .. turns out they use the same directory path on every server. Talking with the support team, apparently they have been using this approach for years and years when installing software on development servers, sounds like the decision was made based upon cost and patching. Back in the days when Excel spreadsheets were used to track licensing ...

Thanks for taking the time in thinking about this ...

Bruce

[mfranz]

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for sharing your use case with us. I have a few questions:

• Are these shares public, or are the related to specific users or workstations?
• How often do you have the agent collect inventory and do you need to scan the shares as often?
• To work around a possible file system incompatibility with the agent, could a custom script collect the information?
• Would there be organizational and/or technical alternatives to map the software?

Best regards,

Markward

[bruce_giles]

 I have a few questions:

• Are these shares public, or are the related to specific users or workstations?  

They are mounted drives used on Linux based Servers

• How often do you have the agent collect inventory and do you need to scan the shares as often?

We only do our agent scans once a week and we probably could get away with less for specific server's

• To work around a possible file system incompatibility with the agent, could a custom script collect the information?

I agree, someone with those skills could probably come up with something.

• Would there be organizational and/or technical alternatives to map the software?

These guys are pretty set in their ways so my initial thought is, I doubt it but should be talked about atleast

Hi Markward, thanks for taking an interest in this, as you suggested, there are a couple of alternatives that could be considered from a process and organizational perspective which could be a challenge to implement, but worth considering.

This is just one example of what can happen in relatively large organizations when processes and standards sway away from best practices etc. I may be able to use IncludeDirectory paths once I hear back from my Unix teams if by chance we use a set of standard directories on UNIX servers that would capture the bulk of where software should be installed. My only concern would be if the NAS or Network Attached Servers would have the same directory paths, not to mention that we use clusters and other methods in our NAS environment so I must avoid impacting the performance of these environments when and if we choose to scan these Network drives.

Atleast we learn something each day while investigating things of this nature .. its all good. We may just have to have the License team manually associate the software to these servers, as it currently sits at about 30 or so servers which are configured this way so its not a huge undertaking.

Thx Again

Bruce