8 ms·

Can anyone recommend an alternative?

by vmay 11y ago

lcswi 11y ago
5$ for a 500 gigabyte server, put seafile on it, done.
- GordonS 11y ago
  Where can you get a 500GB server for $5?
  - ctz 11y ago
    OVH gives me an Atom-based thing with a 500GB disk for £2.98pm.
    - GordonS 11y ago
      I'm looking on the OVH website, but I don't see it?
      - JosephRedfern 11y ago
        It's from Kimsufi, OVH's unmanaged, budget offering: https://www.kimsufi.com/en/ https://www.kimsufi.com/en/
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
  - mappu 11y ago
    The closest deals i know are - 4TB is 25 GBP/mo at SoYouStart - 250GB is 7 USD/mo at BuyVM
leke 11y ago
I think I'm going to wait for his opensource, non-profit alternative.
- bitJericho 11y ago
  Would it be a violation of a non-compete to drum up interest before the non-compete expires?
  - wsr 11y ago
    This is a very good question. I really hope someone with domain knowledge answers it.
  - pgeorgi 11y ago
    that depends on his actual non-compete agreement, not some generic legal theory.
staticelf 11y ago
I can recommend spideroak.com
- Veratyr 11y ago
  And I can recommend against it. I attempted to use them for a while but found the upload speeds of their (proprietary and closed) clients to be utterly useless for anything more than a trivial amount of data. Everything I found pointed to it being a client issue (the client was simply not uploading 90% of the time and my PC was more than capable of performing the required encryption and hashing operations far faster than my network connection could accept the bits) so I opened a ticket and talked to their support for over 6 months (!!!) and in the end they decided to just refund my money. If you have a trivial amount of data, go ahead and use the $7, 30GB plan but don't fall for their 1TB plan, there's no way you can get close to using it.
bigiain 11y ago
Assume "the cloud" is always untrustworthy, and act accordingly. Sync encrypted filesystems to the cloud. EncFS has some known issues, but for a lot of my stuff, where it's "write once read many times" it still seems to be OK from an encryption point of view - though it inevitably leaks file size information. On the other hand, it does play very nicely with Dropbox/GoogleDrive/BTSync - although for the sufficiently paranoid you need to consider the risk of the Dropbox/GoogleDive/BTSync binary running on your device having access to the unencrypted local partition... Using rsync or some open source sync tool might mitigate that somewhat (but I suspect if you've got data which you suspect an attacker might subvert Google or Dropbox to get access to, you _really_ shouldn't be trying to work out how to protect that data on someone else's storage - buy your own hard drives and deal with multiple copies and geographically separate duplicates yourself) (because remember, there is no "cloud" there is only "other people's computers")
michaelmcmillan 11y ago
tarsnap

Can anyone recommend an alternative?

by vmay 11y ago

Can anyone recommend an alternative?

lcswi 11y ago

5$ for a 500 gigabyte server, put seafile on it, done.

GordonS 11y ago
Where can you get a 500GB server for $5?
- ctz 11y ago
  OVH gives me an Atom-based thing with a 500GB disk for £2.98pm.
  - GordonS 11y ago
    I'm looking on the OVH website, but I don't see it?
    - JosephRedfern 11y ago
      It's from Kimsufi, OVH's unmanaged, budget offering: https://www.kimsufi.com/en/ https://www.kimsufi.com/en/
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
- mappu 11y ago
  The closest deals i know are - 4TB is 25 GBP/mo at SoYouStart - 250GB is 7 USD/mo at BuyVM

leke 11y ago

I think I'm going to wait for his opensource, non-profit alternative.

bitJericho 11y ago
Would it be a violation of a non-compete to drum up interest before the non-compete expires?
- wsr 11y ago
  This is a very good question. I really hope someone with domain knowledge answers it.
- pgeorgi 11y ago
  that depends on his actual non-compete agreement, not some generic legal theory.

staticelf 11y ago

I can recommend spideroak.com

Veratyr 11y ago
And I can recommend against it. I attempted to use them for a while but found the upload speeds of their (proprietary and closed) clients to be utterly useless for anything more than a trivial amount of data. Everything I found pointed to it being a client issue (the client was simply not uploading 90% of the time and my PC was more than capable of performing the required encryption and hashing operations far faster than my network connection could accept the bits) so I opened a ticket and talked to their support for over 6 months (!!!) and in the end they decided to just refund my money. If you have a trivial amount of data, go ahead and use the $7, 30GB plan but don't fall for their 1TB plan, there's no way you can get close to using it.

bigiain 11y ago

Assume "the cloud" is always untrustworthy, and act accordingly. Sync encrypted filesystems to the cloud. EncFS has some known issues, but for a lot of my stuff, where it's "write once read many times" it still seems to be OK from an encryption point of view - though it inevitably leaks file size information. On the other hand, it does play very nicely with Dropbox/GoogleDrive/BTSync - although for the sufficiently paranoid you need to consider the risk of the Dropbox/GoogleDive/BTSync binary running on your device having access to the unencrypted local partition... Using rsync or some open source sync tool might mitigate that somewhat (but I suspect if you've got data which you suspect an attacker might subvert Google or Dropbox to get access to, you _really_ shouldn't be trying to work out how to protect that data on someone else's storage - buy your own hard drives and deal with multiple copies and geographically separate duplicates yourself) (because remember, there is no "cloud" there is only "other people's computers")

michaelmcmillan 11y ago

tarsnap