11–20 of 45 posts
IPFS already has a storage and data layer as well as integrity and other properties. I wonder if it would be a good backend for this filesystem.
mtgx - you are dead. I haven't looked at native OpenZFS encryption... The method I used for a while was having a Veracrypt volume locally of all my files, and zfs-sending it to a remote location. It is a large file, several gigabytes. However, any updates made locally would get synced remotely at a block level vs. a file level, so the whole encrypted file didn't need synced. Much better than rsync, for example. I did…
Yeah I wondered this too. They don't say why they chose that wording. Maybe it's a subtle nod to that datacenter
Interesting name for a file system. Reminds me of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center
mtgx - you are dead. I haven't looked at native OpenZFS encryption... The method I used for a while was having a Veracrypt volume locally of all my files, and zfs-sending it to a remote location. It is a large file, several gigabytes. However, any updates made locally would get synced remotely at a block level vs. a file level, so the whole encrypted file didn't need synced. Much better than rsync, for example. I did…
IPFS already has a storage and data layer as well as integrity and other properties. I wonder if it would be a good backend for this filesystem.
You'd have to find someone to permanently pin the data (nobody will be interested in random encrypted databoxes without being paid for it). And at that point you're just loosing performance compared to S3 or WebDAV.
Another thought less well explored would be to swap space with friends such that you hold each others pins but you can't read your friends' encrypted blocks. This is kind of the premise behind filecoin, which lets you buy space (ie if you want someone to hold your blocks) and sell space (ie, mining is equal to holding someone's blocks).
Dropbox and Google could easily encrypt the files locally with your own key prior to uploading them to their servers. But of course they won't do that, because then how else will they mine your data? Also, you probably shouldn't trust them even if they did offer this anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd have to find someone to permanently pin the data (nobody will be interested in random encrypted databoxes without being paid for it). And at that point you're just loosing performance compared to S3 or WebDAV.
Yes you can pay to have someone pin it--there are pinning services--but you can also just replicate it among your own nodes. It would be comparable to Dropbox plus encryption. Another thought less well explored would be to swap space with friends such that you hold each others pins but you can't read your friends' encrypted blocks. This is kind of the premise behind filecoin, which lets you buy space (ie if you want…
Dropbox and Google could easily encrypt the files locally with your own key prior to uploading them to their servers. But of course they won't do that, because then how else will they mine your data? Also, you probably shouldn't trust them even if they did offer this anyway.
Also (and more charitably), I'm pretty sure at least Dropbox deduplicates files between customers.