Fusion ITAR question/conundrum
Close
Login to Your Account
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Medina OH
    Posts
    2,351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    337
    Likes (Received)
    1163

    Default Fusion ITAR question/conundrum

    I’ve recently been having a plethora of issues with Fusion. Tool paths won’t generate, I lose existing tool paths, I lose “protected” tool paths, I get all kinds of errors, and I finally had a big problem where an error popped up that Fusion Cam shut down and was no longer working.

    I submitted a ticket and requested contact. 8 days later I got an email. They’ve never seen the error before. The guy requested we do a screen share so that we can take a look at the issues I’m having. We set up an appointment and I sit and wait. And wait. 15 minutes after the appointment was supposed to start I get an email asking for an update. I email back that I thought we had scheduled an appointment and was awaiting their call. 10 minutes later I get a call. . . . . From Singapore.

    Now to the crux of the issue. Some people claim Autodesk is ITAR compliant some people insist they are not. I’m in the latter camp, I don’t particularly think the cloud is ITAR compliant. Regardless, I have parts, depending on the day of the week and depending on the whim of the administration would be considered ITAR material, IF exported. I don’t export, and thankfully these parts were moved under the Dept of Commerce. However, if exported, they would potentially be ITAR.

    Autodesk has now asked me to share this file with them so that they can try and figure out what is causing the issue.

    If I’m sending a file containing parts that I could not legally export to Singapore, wouldn’t that be a violation? I’m absolutely sure no one would know or care, the stuff I make is irrelevant to ITSR, but can still be classified that way of someone wanted to.

    Edited to add: seeing as a Department of Commerce investigator showed up at a friends house recently with questions about a $100 scope from the 1950’s he sold on eBay that wound up, apparently, in Malaysia, I guess I’m a little more concerned.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    LATVIA
    Posts
    758
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    443

    Default

    Is it possible to replicate the error using the same model features but drawn from scratch in a new file? Or at least reduce the model to just the problem causing features, export it as a STEP file, reimport and try to replicate the CAM issue, perhaps that would also allow you to share that file and not violate any possible ITAR issues?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Medina OH
    Posts
    2,351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    337
    Likes (Received)
    1163

    Default

    This problem is relatively stupid, but I’m not sure how to force Fusion to replicate it.

    I have one really good example, a part with 7 setups, all 7 were protected. If you open the file now, there are no tool paths.

    The guy said, oh, you just un protect them and regenerate them. Well, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of a protected tool path?

    I’m going to try another VERBOTEN process in Fusion, and use “Save As” to create a copy of the file, and then see how far I can strip the part down and if it retains anything.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    228
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    15
    Likes (Received)
    11

    Default

    If you haven't already, you would be well served to determine if your cad data is officially designated as itar controlled. This is the code that defines that designation:
    Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)

    If you truly have itar controlled data, fusion on the cloud is probably not acceptable, even aside from sharing data with tech support outside of the US. We had gmail hosted email at my last company and we were not permitted to accept or transmit itar data since gmail at the time didn't guarantee all servers were in the US with controlled access. We ended up with an itar compliant FTP service for controlled data.

    as for the flakiness of fusion cam, I'm right there with you, though I run HSMworks inside solidworks. I fight with 3d finishing paths constantly. I especially have trouble getting the contact boundary to solve as I would like, and lots of random tiny cuts that kill my cycle time and cause cosmetic blemishes. Also retract policies for deep features, it constantly collides with the part so I end up retracting to the model top and wasting loads of rapid motion.

    Good luck getting some better results.
    Mike

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    6,149
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2436
    Likes (Received)
    3054

    Default

    When I was in an ITAR shop last, we were making (non) ITAR parts in another country. Even though the parts weren't ITAR controlled, the shop was so we (IT) had to set up a server network for us to share parts, NO email allowed, etc. I know this doesn't directly address your problem, but if they aren't ITAR, and your shop isn't either, I don't think I would be too concerned.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    268
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    78
    Likes (Received)
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fal Grunt View Post

    Now to the crux of the issue. Some people claim Autodesk is ITAR compliant some people insist they are not. I’m in the latter camp, I don’t particularly think the cloud is ITAR compliant. Regardless, I have parts, depending on the day of the week and depending on the whim of the administration would be considered ITAR material, IF exported. I don’t export, and thankfully these parts were moved under the Dept of Commerce. However, if exported, they would potentially be ITAR.
    I did quite a bit of digging last year and Fusion 360 is not ITAR compliant. There is something about the cloud servers being able to be compliant, but with how Autodesk has it structured it is not actually compliant. Seemed like it was to avoid costs/legal risks.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Colorado
    Posts
    207
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    32
    Likes (Received)
    80

    Default

    Fusion is 1000% not ITAR compliant, they can't guarantee their servers are on US soil and additionally theyve probably been hacked at least a handful of times in the past. Any company with a lick of confidentiality or NDA compliance isn't gonna want to fuck around with a shop using Fusion 360. There's a reason aerospace shops use Mastercam or Esprit or Hypermill and NX or Solidworks for CAD, and it ain't because they love shelling out hundreds of thousands per year on software alone.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Alabama,USA
    Posts
    21
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    14
    Likes (Received)
    6

    Default

    I agree with Autodesk/Fusion360 not being ITAR. They told me themselves. What i do is use HSMWorks which is an entitlement with Fusion. That keeps us in compliance with ITAR.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    14,563
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2801
    Likes (Received)
    4293

    Default

    Parallel subject - How secure is the autodesk viewer? Can an ordinary user get access to the models viewed in the viewer? Meaning download them or otherwise reverse engineer them?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    LATVIA
    Posts
    758
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    443

    Default

    by default, as far as I remember, downloading of the model is enabled from within the viewer when you enable sharing, owner can switch it off, and you can add another layer of security requiring a password to view the shared model

    so no - an ordinary user won't be able to download it unless you allow it yourself, cracking the viewer to gain access to the model when it is downloaded by the browser app, who knows, haven't looked into that

  11. Likes Mud liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •