Sending a Large Attachment to a Client
Aisha must send a 38 MB video file and a 4 MB PDF to a client by 5 p.m. Her email provider rejects attachments over 25 MB. She has a work email account and a personal account. The video contains a client's logo and an unreleased product. She considers: (a) splitting the video into two parts and sending two emails, (b) uploading to a free public file-sharing site with a guessable link, (c) using her organisation's approved cloud storage and sending a sharing link, or (d) sending from her personal account to get around the size limit. She is in a hurry and the client is waiting.
1. Evaluate options (a)–(d) and recommend one, giving reasons.
Read the worked answer
| Option | Verdict |
|---|---|
| (a) Split into two emails | Technically works, but the client must reassemble the file, and the parts may arrive out of order or be blocked separately. Fragile, and still puts confidential material through unencrypted email. |
| (b) Free public site, guessable link | Unacceptable. Unreleased product material on a public link is a confidentiality breach; guessable links can be found or shared onward. |
| (c) Approved cloud storage + sharing link | Recommended. Handles the size limit, keeps the file inside a controlled environment, allows access to be restricted and revoked, and typically logs who accessed it. |
| (d) Personal account to bypass the limit | Unacceptable. Moves work data outside organisational control, may breach policy, and doesn't actually solve the size limit. |
Recommend (c), with the link restricted to the client's address and an expiry date set.
2. Name two further precautions Aisha should take beyond choosing option (c), and say what risk each addresses.
Read the worked answer
- Set an expiry date and, if possible, a password/PIN on the link - limits the window in which a leaked or forwarded link is useful, and stops anyone who obtains the URL from opening the file.
- Restrict access to the named recipient's email address, and verify the address before sending - prevents misdelivery to a wrong or similarly spelled address, which is a common cause of confidential data leaks.
Optional extras worth mentioning: check the file contains no unintended metadata; confirm the client can actually open the format; and keep a record of what was shared and when, in case the link needs to be revoked.