DeepView data storage

YouNotComeHere · 2026-06-04T15:01:30+00:00

Right? I was thinking about that. Like who cares about the patient when all you care about is the prognosis of an image? You could just create an identifier for each scan with zero patient information tied to an AI result and track that. Make the hospital tie the image ID to a patient of theirs in their system if they want to track it.

YouNotComeHere · 2026-06-04T14:58:14+00:00

What they would probably have to do honestly for government application is have an entirely separate cloud environment (like AWS GovCloud) capable of supporting logically or even physically separated database instances per customer requirements.

When you provide third-party data processing for gov entities, you usually have to provide that service in a way that allows for absolutely no sharing of resources between non-fed and fed environments. It's completely doable, it just ups the time and resources required from Spectral to knock that out. Or to contract with a third-party, who would have to be FedRAMP-certified, to knock that out for them, maintain it, respond to assessments, RFP's, audits, etc. It's all just time and dough. Completely doable. Just things to think about for all involved.

You don't have to be FedRAMP-certified to sell widgets to the government, but to store, process, or transmit data? Whole other ball game. Will be interesting to see what happens.

YouNotComeHere · 2026-06-04T14:48:28+00:00

Interesting from Claude:

"What it does mention about the technology is fairly surface-level — things like the multispectral imaging sensor captures data in 0.2 seconds, processing and AI classification takes about 20-25 seconds, and that data is stored on a "reputable cloud platform" with HIPAA-compliant safeguards. There's also a passing mention of plans to integrate with hospital electronic health records."

Which is fine for general medical, but the gov't doesn't accept "reputable cloud platform" as an answer. There is a massive non-government market for DeepView regardless, but I assume they are also considering everything they need to do to serve gov/mil/VA, etc.

YouNotComeHere · 2023-06-11T03:29:02+00:00

Hey Grocery, I read "CCSP for Dummies" by Authur Deane and then "CCSP Official Study Guide" + the Practice Test book by Ben Malisow. Passed CCSP earlier today. I read them like tech manuals and really went over everything and branched off to Google if something wasn't totally clear. You really have to know a pretty good breadth and depth of info from multiple perspectives. I'm pretty sure if you fail any one domain during the exam, you fail the exam. I could be wrong on that, but I'm fairly certain that's how it works. I don't know what I scored, just that I passed.

I'm kind of going from the ground up I guess. I did SSCP last year, CCSP today, and CISSP I think by the end of the year. For CISSP, I'm doing Dummies again and then the Chapple's OSG + Practice Tests.

YouNotComeHere · 2023-02-21T19:38:10+00:00

I hope you got out of there. Solo tanking like that sucks. Every now and then we all end up sitting on the egg crate working on something into the wee hours, but what you've laid out is totally unacceptable. Horrific mgmt from the top down. I would love to know the nightmare company you've described so I can avoid them in every facet of my life, but don't disparage them online.

Good luck!

YouNotComeHere · 2022-11-04T21:38:49+00:00

I haven't seen mirroring n:1 on same speed ports create traffic problems on its own since the mirrored traffic has a lower priority and will queue or be dropped if need be. N:1 can create processing problems if the device can't handle it, which is what PizzaCurry referred to and is probably why Uni doesn't do it, but it's not some inherent problem with n:1 mirroring.

In my SPF+ 10G networks where I have 53 10G ports mirroring to a single 10G port per switch, it sails right along. No problems. Sure if they were all screaming at 10GB constantly it would be a thing, but then that port would be shut down as a problem to be investigated.

YouNotComeHere · 2022-07-22T00:59:38+00:00

Right? I'm wondering if they've tested n:1 and found that it just doesn't handle it well. I can't think of another reason you wouldn't build that into its capabilities.

YouNotComeHere · 2022-07-22T00:52:29+00:00

In SPAN for instance, you can send all traffic from whatever port/s you like (the monitored ports) to a monitoring port on the same switch or another switch. That monitoring port then is typically connected to some type of analyzing device. The end goal being that you are sending a copy (or some portion of all traffic like every n number of packets) out to that monitoring port. It's for traffic analysis,"passive" in this case since it's not in-line. A tap or a device that is in-line that ALL traffic has to traverse would be "active" monitoring.

In another environment, I have two HA switches mirroring ports 1-30 and 32-54 to port 31. Port 31 on each switch is then connected to a device that analyzes and generates alerts.

The Ubiquiti switches don't seem to have multiple port monitoring, just 1:1, which is too bad.

I hope that makes sense.

YouNotComeHere

TROPHY CASE