Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

send.firefox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 285 posts

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#111

Post by C0DEHERO »

wybiral wrote: post #72
bubblethink wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both parties would have to be online for any p2p solution to work. And if they are online, there are plenty of ways to create a p2p link. It is complicated by things like NAT though. However, that is the less common case. In most cases, the receiver isn't going to be online. So you need an intermediate server, and that's how you end up with third party solutions.

Yeah, the "being online" detail seems like the problem. It would be best if the encrypted data were distributed (something like IPFS) but then why would peers host files that aren't for them.

They don't currently, but Filecoin is supposed to create an incentive for people to host other people's files. Obviously, you'll have to pay some amount to have your files hosted.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#112

Post by jwcacces »

ElijahLynn wrote: post #102

One thing that could be improved with this is to have an option for a human readable/typeable link. I wanted to quickly transfer a file from my desktop to my phone. Used Send and realized I didn't want to type that cryptographic URL. I ran the Send link through Typer.in (specializing in hand-typed urls) and it worked as I initially expected. However, it would be nice if Send had this functionality by default.

Typer.in stores the link you give it, and returns a human readable lookup link. The whole point of Send is that the link includes the secret key to decrypt your file. Whoever you give that secret to, including Typer.in can get the file.

The Send link must include the secret key, because no one else should get it, and that key must be of sufficient length to protect your file. Thus human-readable-izing it could do nothing to decrease its complexity and would just result in a huge string of words that were just as much as a pain to type in.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#113

Post by rodolphoarruda »

mapgrep wrote: post #107
microtonal wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Resilio Sync (formerly Bittorrent Sync) pretty much offers that. They use relays in case both peers cannot pierce NAT, but the relays only see ciphertext. They also have apps for Android and iOS, making transfers to mobile devices also possible. Since it is closed-source software, it's up to you to decide whether you trust the software. SyncThing is a free software alternative, but I wouldn't say that it is usable (y…

I used BitTorrent Sync for a couple of years and loved it. Has it evolved much under the Resilio banner?

Me too. I stopped using it after I read somewhere that it could be hacked to include new peers to your connection without your awareness, which is a serious concern. I don't know how legit the claim was... but I opted to avoid the risk.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#114

Post by m-p-3 »

C0DEHERO wrote: post #111
wybiral wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the "being online" detail seems like the problem. It would be best if the encrypted data were distributed (something like IPFS) but then why would peers host files that aren't for them.

They don't currently, but Filecoin is supposed to create an incentive for people to host other people's files. Obviously, you'll have to pay some amount to have your files hosted.

Storj is based on a similar concept.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#116

Post by ge0rg »

Aissen wrote: post #93

I've just checked the code. It indeed deletes the file once a download has been completely consumed, so it can't really replace other file-sharing services. BUT I wonder how does it deal with race conditions ? My guess is that if many people start a download at the same time, they'll all be able to complete it before the file goes away. At least that's how I'd see it working with S3 or local storage. You could abuse…

The sender could open a download connection and stall it as far as possible (maybe keep the download rate shaped to some bytes/second, to prevent an inactivity timeout). That would open a large time window for further downloads.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#117

Post by staz »

mwest wrote: post #83
NikolaeVarius wrote: post #5

It really is a shame that there still isn't a easy way (A person whose computer knowledge extends to using facebook), that I know of, of sending arbitrarily large files that isn't tethered to a specific cloud service and is also reliable (can tolerate connection dropping). It seems that bitorrent protocols are pretty close, but I don't think there is a seamless client that allows for "magical" point to point transact…

I've found https://github.com/warner/magic-wormhole really useful, although it only meets 1/3 of your requirements. I'm hoping someone will add a nice GUI and re-transmission. Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14649727

On the principle it look really nice, but with a quick glance at the code I'm not too sure I would trust it...

https://github.com/warner/magic-wormhole/blob/master/src/wor...

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#118

Post by padenot »

AndrewDucker wrote: post #46
padenot wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those services are for the initial peer discovery and SDP exchange, which can be done by other means (using any other side-channel). Ongoing work is happening, for example by the webtorrent folks, to remove this constraint.

Yeah, it's initial peer discovery and connection setup (if behind NAT) I'm talking about. Once you've found the other PC and got a connection set up then all is well ;-) Do these services also act as connectors in case of double NAT?

They certainly can, I don't know if they do in practice. It always work for me, so I haven't investigated too much.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#119

Post by mnx »

It seems nice, but I think it should be made more explicit upon downloading, that you can only do that once. I can see myself e.g. downloading a file I received on my phone to take a quick look, intending to then download it again on my computer later. I would be surprised to see it just gone.

Re: Firefox Send: Private, Encrypted File Sharing

#120

Post by tjoff »

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #5

It really is a shame that there still isn't a easy way (A person whose computer knowledge extends to using facebook), that I know of, of sending arbitrarily large files that isn't tethered to a specific cloud service and is also reliable (can tolerate connection dropping). It seems that bitorrent protocols are pretty close, but I don't think there is a seamless client that allows for "magical" point to point transact…

And this isn't? (Honest question, hasn't looked at it hard enough yet)

I don't disagree with you but I kind of expected a note as to why this wasn't a solution in this context.

Post reply on HN