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

Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 421 posts

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#321

Post by thinkloop »

Radim wrote: post #166
vishnumohandas wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, so the project had initially started off as a self-hostable software (with an option to buy a pre-configured device). We realized soon that it's hard to monetize such a product in the consumer space to the point where it can become self-sustaining. We don't have a problem with offering a self-hosted variant. But given our limited engineering bandwidth we had to take a call on who our target market should be, and…

> We realized soon that it's hard to monetize such [self-hosted product] Spot on. We iterated on a similar product in this space: "privacy preserving", "self-hosted", "open source" etc. But focused on local AI indexing & search of personal videos and photos [0], rather than backups. We ultimately shelved VideoNinja because we weren't able to find a sustainable business angle: * Non-technical people simply don't care…

> I want nothing of mine (of value) in the cloud.

What's the issue with the cloud if you encrypt client-side? It's off-site backup. Isn't it too risky to have your life's work on a few drives in the same location?

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#322

Post by rock_hard »

creato wrote: post #198
vishnumohandas wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Photos seems to be using just Core ML[1] for on-device recognition and it does a pretty good job. As for Android, we plan to use tflite, but the accuracy is yet to be measured. And if customers do install our desktop app, we will be able to improve the indexes by re-indexing data with the extra bit of compute available. We don't feel that the entire UX of a photo storage app will "suck" because of a reduced acc…

Core ML and TFlite are just tools for running ML models. Generating the models is the hard part, and that is what encryption will make more difficult.

Bingo!

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#323

Post by vishnumohandas »

bigiain wrote: post #314
Roritharr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the same boat, have been watching, love that they have a businessmodel and am waiting for the time when they are covering my needs (face recognition, object / scene detection...). I'd even pay a 2$/month "lurker" subscription which has like 100mb of storage so I can check the features from time to time and support the team.

So this is a project specifically marketed as E2E encrypted, and you are "waiting for the time when they are covering my needs (face recognition, object / scene detection...)" You will be waiting a long long time for that. The only way they can do that is client side, and if they go there we are back to the last few weeks discussion of Apple's new client side image scanning shit. You do not want this service, it seem…

> we are back to the last few weeks discussion of Apple's new client side image scanning

Apple has always been indexing images on the client side. What changed is that they're now reporting the presence of a predetermined set of hashes to authorities.

If governments were to mandate that such reporting is necessary, it is likely that the enforcement will be on a device/OS level, extending the example set by Apple. Demanding compliance from every single cloud storage provider out there (E2EE or not) would be a sub optimal route for them to take.

My point being, "client side indexing" is not the evil here, and it is unlikely that storage providers will be the ones forced to share data. Your concerns should probably be directed at your operating system.

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#324

Post by encryptluks2 »

You know you could just use Jottacloud for a fraction of the price. Also, Google Drive supports multiple encryption providers. I use rclone, and for $99 a year you can get 2TB of storage or more with Google Workspace. I don't understand why this is so expensive when in reality you can get the same from other providers for much cheaper. It isn't like Google Drive has to be unencrypted.

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#325

Post by jaza »

sabujp wrote: post #87

what are currently the best open source projects that allow you to fully automate and manage deployment of your own personal (or multi-user) cloud photos/drive storage service? I found: [1]: https://github.com/nextcloud [2]: https://github.com/Piwigo with S3 extension: https://piwigo.org/ext/extension_view.php?eid=691 [3]: others https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/06/the-big-alternatives-to-google-photos-showdown/…

I migrated my photo collection to https://github.com/jpsim/AWSPics about a year ago, pretty happy with it (so much so that I ended up contributing a number of features and bug fixes back to it). Basically all you have to do, after the initial setup, is an S3 sync to upload new photos, and a gallery web site and resized thumbnails get generated automatically.

All private, you configure usernames and passwords. The ongoing cost is just that of S3 standard / infrequent-access storage, which for my collection of ~50GB is currently costing me about ~$1/month. In terms of the auto-generated gallery (lambda function that traverses an S3 bucket) and the password-protection (CloudFront Origin Access Identity), you're locked in to AWS. But in terms of the data, you by definition have all the files in a simple folder tree on your local disk too, you can back it up wherever else you want, you can migrate it elsewhere quite easily. And AWSPics itself is open-source.

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#327

Post by thinkloop »

istingray wrote: post #279
vishnumohandas wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drawing a direct parallel with Google will make this difficult, since they own their storage and network infrastructure and have ways to monetize your data. But here's an explanation on why there are large gaps between plans: - Our 1TB plan costs only 3x the 100GB plan. This model works under the assumption that the average utilization of a 1TB plan (across all customers) will be ~30%. - If we were to bring in an int…

Curious about alternatives. GB to GB, other services will always be cheaper. How do you help frame pricing What about charging per picture? Likely a non-starter, but you get where I'm going with this. iPod = 1,000 songs in your pocket. If not you, someone will figure this out. Charging by the GB seems hard. What if instead your levels were: 1,000 photos 10,000 photos 100,000 photos You might get people who store supe…

My phone photos are 2.2 MB each. 1,000 GB's is 1M MB's which equates to approximately 450,000 photos. At $18.99/TB/year, 1,000 photos would cost ~$0.42 a year.

Photos can easily be 30 MB each or more, especially from dedicated cameras. If all photos were 30 MB it would cost $5.69 per year for 1,000 photos.

Not making any point, just calculated it for myself and thought to share.

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#328

Post by vishnumohandas »

novok wrote: post #296

Another thing to keep in mind with this kind of software is tracking data loss, corruption and deletion. I've used photo management services before, and have had data loss that I can't explain from this year or that year. Did I delete it? Did I do a migration wrong? Did the software silently delete it? I'm not quite sure. What is even worse is you cannot get 'another copy' of these photos from elsewhere, because they…

Sharing some of the steps we've taken at ente to reduce the probability of such events:

- All files uploaded to ente are versioned and older versions are available for 60 days from the day you updated them.

- File deletions are performed only as a function of user action. Deleted files are again recoverable for 60 days.

- Two copies of each file are maintained with separate storage providers. Both of these providers offer 11x9 durability.

- For each uploaded file, we compare the number of bytes uploaded from the client to that received on the server and request a reupload in case there is a mismatch (to be replaced with a hash check).

We understand your concerns and will continue to invest in steps that improve data integrity and durability.

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#329

Post by istingray »

thinkloop wrote: post #327
istingray wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious about alternatives. GB to GB, other services will always be cheaper. How do you help frame pricing What about charging per picture? Likely a non-starter, but you get where I'm going with this. iPod = 1,000 songs in your pocket. If not you, someone will figure this out. Charging by the GB seems hard. What if instead your levels were: 1,000 photos 10,000 photos 100,000 photos You might get people who store supe…

My phone photos are 2.2 MB each. 1,000 GB's is 1M MB's which equates to approximately 450,000 photos. At $18.99/TB/year, 1,000 photos would cost ~$0.42 a year. Photos can easily be 30 MB each or more, especially from dedicated cameras. If all photos were 30 MB it would cost $5.69 per year for 1,000 photos. Not making any point, just calculated it for myself and thought to share.

I like this line of thinking.

You know it really gets me thinking about packages rather than GB for this service. Maybe there's a "family plan" opportunity here. Do families value anti-surveillance in general, or is it simply lone actors?

Just the idea of archetypes flashed through my mind. An opportunity to sell to difference audiences. What kind of algos do individuals need, pro photographers, families?

Re: Show HN: We built an end-to-end encrypted alternative to Google Photos

#330

Post by vishnumohandas »

soheil wrote: post #326

Love the idea. What happens if I delete a photo in Photos app on iOS does it get backed up by Ente at any point automatiaclly before it's deleted?

From our observations, the only way to reliably sync data with remote on iOS is to keep the app in the foreground. The behavior is unpredictable otherwise.
Post reply on HN