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

Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

ente.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 331 posts

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#101

Post by vishnumohandas »

prmoustache wrote: post #98

I don't think this service is End-to-End encrypted the way we would like to think it is. If you can share pictures with friends by just giving them a link to a page, the server app has the encryption keys too.

Hey, details on how we're providing E2EE with links has been documented here: https://ente.io/blog/building-shareable-links/

Some bits of the blog post are outdated, since the feature has matured since then. But the implementation details are roughly the same.

TL;DR: The keys are added to the URL fragment (the part that follows the #), and these fragments are not accessible to the server.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#102

Post by yau8edq12i »

diggan wrote: post #64
yau8edq12i wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, the underlying storage of the synology won't last forever. A cheap SSD might reliably last five years, a nice one, about ten years, as far as I know. You also need to pay for the electricity necessary to keep your server running 24/7, if you want a service level equivalent to a cloud storage service. All this adds up. The scales will probably stay in favor of the self-hosting options, but you have to take…

> A cheap SSD might reliably last five years, a nice one, about ten years, as far as I know. It's unlikely that people are using SSDs for the main storage on a NAS though, commonly just used for smaller parts (think metadata in ZFS-land for example), not for the main storage. Precisely for that reason.

Hard drives last even less, what is even your point? I don't understand. Do you suggest they store their photos on magnetic tape or what?

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#103

Post by kosolam »

vishnumohandas wrote: post #82
kosolam wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you provide an easy migration from google photos with full quality? The instructions in the FAQ are a bit vague. Last time I heard about this, Google takeout won’t let you download the full quality images.

Google Takeout downloads the images in full quality. But it splits your metadata (like capture time, geo coordinates) and places them in a separate sidecar file. This isn't an issue if you're migrating to Ente because during import the desktop app[1] will merge the metadata with their respective files. If it's for you to keep a local copy, you will unfortunately need to write some scripts. There's in fact a paid prod…

That’s good to hear. Do you forsee the 2tb plan getting cheaper in the future?

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#104

Post by thisgoodlife »

icar wrote: post #99
prmoustache wrote: post #98

I don't think this service is End-to-End encrypted the way we would like to think it is. If you can share pictures with friends by just giving them a link to a page, the server app has the encryption keys too.

The link contains the needed keys. It's explained in their FAQ.

If the link contains the keys, does that mean the server can also see these keys?

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#105

Post by adithyassekhar »

lakpan wrote: post #97
adithyassekhar wrote: post #95

Why is local on device ml a pro when compared to google photos? Part of the value for photos for me is the fact that they do all the ml work ahead of time on their servers and not my tiny battery powered gadget. I can open it in on any device and search any photo instantly.

You plug your phone in at night, so it probably has 7 hours a day to do that work. iOS does the same. They cannot do it on the server because they don’t have access to them.

I am aware of the why, it's claimed to be e2e. But then it shouldn't be touted as a "pro" when compared to Google Photos which the site's home page is asking me to do. Hence the question.

As for iOS, Apple controls the whole stack. Whatever ML they do, they do it only on devices capable of that level of ML.

I can buy the cheapest android I can find with a 10 year old mediatek processor and search for pictures of my dog and it'll show it. There is a value to doing the heavy things on a heavy hitting server.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#106

Post by vishnumohandas »

Faizan711 wrote: post #93

Isn't the pricing a bit on the upper side, It could have been lower like similar to google one

Google has ways to monetize your data. If I were them, I would be attaching a price tag to cloud storage simply to not seem suspicious :)

Most of our costs come from keeping 3 replicas of your data: https://ente.io/reliability

We could perhaps reduce the replicas from 3 (2 hot, 1 cold) to 2 (1 hot, 1 cold), and lower our costs, but it's not something we've actively thought about.

Also, our prices are designed such that the business can run sustainably, and we believe that's the best way to build Ente, where the expectation is for the company to outlive its customers.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#107

Post by vishnumohandas »

kosolam wrote: post #103
vishnumohandas wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Takeout downloads the images in full quality. But it splits your metadata (like capture time, geo coordinates) and places them in a separate sidecar file. This isn't an issue if you're migrating to Ente because during import the desktop app[1] will merge the metadata with their respective files. If it's for you to keep a local copy, you will unfortunately need to write some scripts. There's in fact a paid prod…

That’s good to hear. Do you forsee the 2tb plan getting cheaper in the future?

Not unless our existing providers provide a volume discount, or we start managing some of the infrastructure (1/3 replicas) ourselves.

The latter is very likely in the long run.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#108

Post by jeltz »

thisgoodlife wrote: post #104
icar wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The link contains the needed keys. It's explained in their FAQ.

If the link contains the keys, does that mean the server can also see these keys?

Nope, the secret is in the url fragment. Of course this means you need to trust that they do not change the JS code so that it steaks your keys.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#109

Post by jacques-noris »

davidodio wrote: post #27
jacques-noris wrote: post #6

I’m looking exactly for something like that. But 2.99 Euro a month is too expensive, when even Apple only wants 99 cents.

Honestly, everyone can do what they want with their money but working in tech and being on a site like this and seeing this comment makes me really sad We all want cool things, secure, where our data is protected and we are not the product, but 3 euros a month is too much? No wonder big tech gets bigger and the rich get richer. The silicon valley VC funded feifdoms become more entrenched and, in the end, we all suffe…

There are much cheaper alternatives to Ente. Filen.io, which is also E2E encrypted, for example costs 200 GB montly for 1.99 Euro. Its difficult to compete with iCloud if your service costs three times as much.

Re: Ente: Open-Source, E2E Encrypted, Google Photos Alternative

#110

Post by upofadown »

prmoustache wrote: post #98

I don't think this service is End-to-End encrypted the way we would like to think it is. If you can share pictures with friends by just giving them a link to a page, the server app has the encryption keys too.

I think a better term for what is happening here is "client side encryption". That reduces the chances of getting things confused with messaging, which is a different sort of a problem.

This at least has a user accessible cryptographic identity, so end to end secure key exchange is possible. So if you really wanted to call it end to end encrypted, it would be legitimate to do so. I suspect that the motivation here is still mostly marketing driven.

Post reply on HN