21–30 of 48 posts
Anyone using SpiderOak? They're the only other versioning diff-based backup service I know of that supports Linux (with a free tier; there's also Tarsnap). They also claim 'zero-knowledge' encryption. Anyone have any opinions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And anyone who stored that sort of data in dropbox more or less had it coming. HIPAA & finance laws are very clear about the security they require -- dropbox has always been hand-wavey in their explanation of their security.
What's your point? The IT guys can't catch a break, can they? If they say "no you can't install stuff on your machine", message board geeks are up in arms. But when normal people, for whom these computer systems are designed in the first place, make (layperson-) reasonable decisions about what folders to put files in, there's the message board geek again, harassing them for not understanding how transparent cloud fil…
On the part of the _users_ of dropbox, I have empathy; In part of those running their medical/finance business on assumptions of dropboxes security, I have nothing but emnity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your point? The IT guys can't catch a break, can they? If they say "no you can't install stuff on your machine", message board geeks are up in arms. But when normal people, for whom these computer systems are designed in the first place, make (layperson-) reasonable decisions about what folders to put files in, there's the message board geek again, harassing them for not understanding how transparent cloud fil…
If you're a 'normal person', you shouldn't be making decisions about the security of my health-care or financial data; If you're in the position to make that decision, you should have been aware that dropbox was not a "safe" third party; On the part of the _users_ of dropbox, I have empathy; In part of those running their medical/finance business on assumptions of dropboxes security, I have nothing but emnity.
† Ok, no I don't
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're a 'normal person', you shouldn't be making decisions about the security of my health-care or financial data; If you're in the position to make that decision, you should have been aware that dropbox was not a "safe" third party; On the part of the _users_ of dropbox, I have empathy; In part of those running their medical/finance business on assumptions of dropboxes security, I have nothing but emnity.
I hate to be the one to break this to you†, but normal people make up almost the entire chain of custody for regulated data. Normal people write your health records. Normal people check them out of databases and read them. Normal people load them into spreadsheets. Normal people generate reports. Businesses do not exist to support super-savvy BOFH's. It is rather the other way around. † Ok, no I don't
EDIT: To phrase less hostilely -- HIPAA and various finance laws consist of thousands of pages of what to do and what not to do. Dropbox is a shiney webpage that isn't PCI certified or HIPAA certified. If you chose to operate in a business that requires HIPAA/PCI, and used dropbox for that data, _you_ are at fault, not dropbox, not the bofhs, and not the coder. In the case of HIPAA - you would be the criminal.
I use any online service with the assumption that the things I put up there could likely become public, no longer anonymous, or what have you. I don't think this is overly paranoid, given how difficult computer security is. To me; it would make sense if Dropbox stored everything encrypted (as in, encrypted pre-transfer), and you needed the private key to decrypt stuff, unless you specifically state that it is to be p…
I use any online service with the assumption that the things I put up there could likely become public, no longer anonymous, or what have you. I don't think this is overly paranoid, given how difficult computer security is. To me; it would make sense if Dropbox stored everything encrypted (as in, encrypted pre-transfer), and you needed the private key to decrypt stuff, unless you specifically state that it is to be p…
The thing is that you can't do email then. You can say that google might leak your emails, but the same is true if you use your private email server.
They're probably rather distracted over at Dropbox, since iCloud is about to eat their business model. That would kinda tend to suck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not exactly true. You just need to be super-paranoid and make sure that everything of importance is sent (on both ends) encrypted. That's still wholly untenable for the real world, but not all paranoid people live in the real world per se.
It's unfortunate that simple public key encryption, which has been easily available for many years, is still seen as untenable and "super-paranoid." Any email client, or better yet Gmail, could easily implement it and make it virtually transparent to the user (when both ends of the email are using such a client, obviously).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can smell all the journalists down voting
hilarious, but you all know that journalists in the tech world are seen as the "I-dont-know-nothing-but-I'll-just-pretend__with-a-smile-like-if-i-understood."