Throttle Shared Users With OS X — Is It Possible?

whisper_jeff writes "I work in a design studio where the production director is also the owner's son (translation = he can do no wrong). He is fond of accessing a designer's computer via filesharing and working directly on files off of the designer's computers rather than transferring the files to his computer to work on them there. In so doing, he causes the designer's computer to grind to a near-halt as the harddrive is now tasked with his open/save requests along with whatever the designer is doing. Given that there is no way he's going to change his ways (since he doesn't see anything wrong with it...), I was wondering if there was a way to throttle a user's shared access to a computer (Mac OSX 10.5.8) so that his remote working would have minimal impact on our work. Google searches have revealed nothing helpful (maybe I should Bing it... :) so I was hoping someone with more technical expertise on Slashdot could offer a suggestion."

Comments

the correct solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Disable file shares on workstations. Use a file server.

Re:the correct solution

[Captain Splendid]

Disable file shares on workstations. Use a file server.

Well, that's the correct technical solution, but the real, supreme, correct decision is: Find a new job, and fast. Nothing good has ever come from challenging a coworker who enjoys immunity, especially when it's familial.

Re:the correct solution

[Thyamine]

This definitely would be a good solution.

But I like the 'Windows' method of solving the problem: reboot. When the co-worker has this sudden slow down on his system, reboot to clear up the 'resource problem'. Certainly a more vindictive way to solve the issue, but effective.

Re:the correct solution

[SQLGuru]

Create a link from your machine to his. Save the file local to his machine instead of yours (via the link). Share out your link to him. He'll actually be taking the long way around back to his own box.

Re:the correct solution

[nine-times]

Having been in similar situations, I more or less agree.

There's no way around it: If the owner is really letting his son do whatever he wants, then any successful technical solution is likely to cause you real-world trouble. You may allow your designers to work better, but if the son goes complaining behind your back to the owner, you'll find yourself suffering more.

The real questions for this situation are (a) Is there any chance the owner is intelligent and reasonable enough for you to discuss the situation? and (b) If not, is your job otherwise good enough to tolerate a boss who's unprofessional enough to allow this sort of thing?

Re:the correct solution

[IronChef]

I had a similar problem a long time ago. One of the 3 partners running the joint was always poking around with file sharing, slowing the single expensive desktop publishing workstation down to a crawl. The perpetrator was the company's Fragile Genius and the other partners told us tough, there was no way they would ask him to modify his behavior.

Eventually, the Fragile Genius began locking himself in his office. There was one window that looked out into a common area, and he spray-painted it black. We believe it was about at this time he started smoking crack in his office.

He also had a kitten, which he rescued from the streets and then began to poison by feeding it nothing but raw hot dogs.

You think it's hard to stop the owner's son from doing anything wrong? Be glad it isn't the owner himself.

But honestly it was not the crack smoking that got the other partners to straighten this guy out. It was his cat peeing on their chairs.

Therefore, my advice is to give the boss's son a kitten and a pack of hot dogs, and maybe some black spray paint. If you know a crack dealer, an introduction may be fruitful.

Re:the correct solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because an IT Admin that can't find the problem in the technology is TOTALLY demonstrating why he continues to be worth his salary.

NEVER PLAY DUMB. EVER. Unless you want your boss to think you are dumb.

Let me repeat: NEVER PLAY DUMB. Especially in an area that within which it is your responsibility to be knowledgeable.

DO be proactive and professional. Do your cost benefit analysis and present it. A file server has enough advantages here that it will easily be worth the money. If cost/benefit doesn't justify it and it's instead a personal gripe, get over it and move on.

Boss is a tightwad that won't spend the cash when it's of obvious benefit (and will make him more in the long run?) You need a new boss who has a more business-like mind. Until then, you can count on not seeing further raises once he feels like you get "enough".

Two Options

[eldavojohn]

Well, I don't think you want to mess with how the operating system handles its network and file system so you have two options. You can either throttle at the router or throttle at the neck. The router option requires you have a capable enough network router connecting you two in order to be able to write a rule for his machine (by IP address or machine name usually) that limits the amount of information he can transfer (I believe this is possible in DD-WRT and is called throttling or traffic shaping). This will cause his experience to become slow and he will most likely complain and bitch to daddy if he knows you did something.

The other option is throttling the neck of the user. This requires somewhat strong hands and forearms applying a pressure to the neck of the user until he stops moving or goes limp. It may result a decreased experience for the user, difficulty breathing, death and in some cases an erection. Use with caution and have an alibi.

I'm glad I'm not the only one

[dave562]

I want to throttle just about every OSX user I've ever met.

Re:I'm glad I'm not the only one

[dave562]

I'm glad that someone got a chuckle out of it before it was modded into oblivion. Those OSX users sure are a sensitive bunch.

ipfw

[thittesd0375]

You can configure a firewall rate limiting statement based on source ip address using ipfw. Then just have an applescript that toggles this than can be run as soon as you notice the computer getting slow.

IPFW should work

[AngusH]

Try using the advice in this tip: http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20080119112509736 which demonstrates bandwidth throttling by port number
but add a rule that limits by ip address as well as port number
see http://developer.apple.com/mac/library/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man8/ipfw.8.html for details of the ipfw rules
I haven't tried this combination myself but I can't see why it wouldn't work.

Use IPFW, its built in

[gbrandt]

OS X uses ipfw as its firewall. Look up 'ipfw throttling' in google. If you don't want to edit ipfw files by hand, hunt out WaterRoof as well.

Throttle the port.

[googlesmith123]

You have to throttle the port the file sharing is running on. Probably 548 or/and 427. To throttle these ports you have to go into terminal and type this:

sudo ipfw pipe 1 config bw 15KByte/s
sudo ipfw add 1 pipe 1 src-port 548

To remove the throttling just type:
sudo ipfw delete 1

Source: http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20080119112509736
http://homepage.mac.com/car1son/static_port_fwd_firewall.html

Be assertive

[QuoteMstr]

This twit isn't your problem. Throttling him on your own initiative is both passive-aggressive and might overstep what the owner expects, which could land you in hot water. Don't do that. Here's what you do instead. Go to the owner's office and say the following:

I've been receiving complaints from some of the design staff about their computers slowing down and interfering with their work. The cause of the problem is the Production Director accessing files on designers' computers instead of copying them to his own. The hard drives on designer computers are not designed to accommodate two users accessing the files at once.

These slowdowns will persist unless we take action to correct the problem. If these remote accesses continue, we will need to increase the capacity of each designer's workstation at a cost of $A per machine for a total of $B. Another option would be to limit these remote accesses by implementing an automatic throttling system. That will take C hours of my time [optionally: at cost $D]." The last, which I recommend, is to create a new workflow for the Production Manager that ensures that designer computers are not overloaded.

What is your decision?

wrong*2==right

[gandhi_2]

plant some weed in his desk and call the cops anon.

problem solved:

[goombah99]

how to set up ipfw in leopard:

see here and here:

http://www.netmojo.ca/2007/10/31/fixing-leopards-firewall/

http://securosis.com/blog/help-build-the-best-ipfw-firewall-rules-sets-ever

or use the GUI tool wateroof to configure the firewall.

add the rules decribed here:
http://www.macgeekery.com/hacks/software/traffic_shaping_in_mac_os_x

then turn it on at boot like this:

http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/2008-May/010337.html

and then turn off the application firewall in system preferences.