<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Digital Preservation Q&amp;A - Recent questions tagged workflow</title>
<link>https://qanda.digipres.org/tag/workflow</link>
<description>Powered by Question2Answer</description>
<item>
<title>What tools do you use for the ongoing monitoring of checksums?</title>
<link>https://qanda.digipres.org/332/what-tools-do-you-use-for-the-ongoing-monitoring-of-checksums</link>
<description>&lt;div style=&quot;font-family: arial; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;
	I am currently working on choosing and implementing a tool to continuously monitor checksums for our digital holdings (digitized content and born-digital materials) across our entire institution. &amp;nbsp;We have a lot of data on our preservation server (we have many terabytes of data, and want to plan ahead for the near future when we break a petabyte) that we want to continuously monitor for bit-rot, and we're wondering about the experiences of other institutions.&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;font-family: arial; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;font-family: arial; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;
	What do you use to monitor the fixity of your preservation masters on an ongoing basis? &amp;nbsp;What (generally speaking) is the workflow like to make sure that checksums happen as often as they're supposed to? &amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;font-family: arial; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;font-family: arial; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;
	Bonus points if you know of a tool that is automated (or at least schedulable), and super-bonus points if it could work on our server and have multiple user accounts for different content administrators.&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://qanda.digipres.org/332/what-tools-do-you-use-for-the-ongoing-monitoring-of-checksums</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 17:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>When to redact AIPs vs DIPs in digital archives workflows?</title>
<link>https://qanda.digipres.org/121/when-to-redact-aips-vs-dips-in-digital-archives-workflows</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;
	Tools like bitcurator are integrating processes for &lt;a rel=&quot;nofollow&quot; href=&quot;http://wiki.bitcurator.net/index.php?title=BitCurator_and_Archival_Workflows&quot;&gt;redacting information from disk images&lt;/a&gt;. So, not just identifying information that you might want to use to make aprasial decisions about what to keep but also the ability to directly redact information from files. I know some folks are planning on using those tools that auto locate personal info and then redacting files or redacting information from inside files.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Given that we have (at least in theory) Archival Information Packages and Disimenation Information packages we could be &lt;span class=&quot;il&quot;&gt;redacting&lt;/span&gt;, when should archivists be &lt;span class=&quot;il&quot;&gt;redacting&lt;/span&gt; the archival copy and when do we want to just be &lt;span class=&quot;il&quot;&gt;redacting&lt;/span&gt; the access materials? If one has information that is sensitive now but would be useful and non-sensitive in 50 years? Or, is the threat of mantaining sensitive information and multiple copies of materials too significant to warrent such an approach? Or, is this something that is going to depend on the particular issues in a collection. If the answer is &quot;it depends&quot; what is it that it depends on?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://qanda.digipres.org/121/when-to-redact-aips-vs-dips-in-digital-archives-workflows</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 14:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>