curious about iCloud with Advanced Data Protection enabled
Considering iCloud does have some documented cases of silent corruption, such as of original resolution media stored in Photos, it might not be the best choice.
End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
21–30 of 105 posts
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#22My understanding was that Tarsnap was just fine and that was the preferred solution for Hacker News outside Dropbox.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#23The world changes once you realize why usually encryption is capped at AES256...
256 bit symmetric cryptography keys are a bit like picking one atom in the universe (10^80 atoms, or 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000). Your opponent would have to test half of the atoms in the universe to have a reasonable chance of getting the right key. That's generally understood to be not feasible.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/09/the_doghouse_...
It's more than that. Simply incrementing your way through a 256 bit counter is impossible by the thermodynamic cost alone.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#24We use Syncdocs (https://syncdocs.com) to do end-to-end Google Drive encryption.
The keys stay on the client. It is secure, but means the files are only decryptable on the client, so keys need to be shared manually. I guess security means extra hassle.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#25My understanding was that Tarsnap was just fine and that was the preferred solution for Hacker News outside Dropbox.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#26Since ente.io's server is just an object storage, I feel at some point either ente or someone else is going to make a drive app for it.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to enlighten us? What did you realize?
It's too CPU heavy and your webservers crash under load would be my guess, for no added benefit [1] of course. [1] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/14068/why-most-...
Correct. Anything higher is an order of magnitude more computationally expensive to do for no real reasonable gain. Multiple layers of encryption get you there far enough. Better to dig deeper into other cryptography methods than try increase AES beyond 256. Its already rather insane how quickly decryption happens.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
256 bit symmetric cryptography keys are a bit like picking one atom in the universe (10^80 atoms, or 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000). Your opponent would have to test half of the atoms in the universe to have a reasonable chance of getting the right key. That's generally understood to be not feasible.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/09/the_doghouse_... It's more than that. Simply incrementing your way through a 256 bit counter is impossible by the thermodynamic cost alone.
Correct. Better to get into other forms of cryptography than pointlessly increase the numbers. We need to think more about PQ proofing.
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#29https://dropbox.tech/security/end-to-end-encryption-for-drop...
dropbox has been mentioned in the article and I think the author is drinking kool-aid and throwing random facts
Re: End-to-End Encrypted Cloud Storage in the Wild: A Broken Ecosystem
#30I wonder how Cryptomator [0], EncFS [1] or gocryptfs [2] stacks up.