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

Upspin – Another option for file sharing

security.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 170 posts

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#131

Post by lars_francke »

webmaven wrote: post #115
josh2600 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dropbox uses one key for all content... Google drive means google can see all of your stuff... Sharing in hangouts is just like drive... WhatsApp isn't close to this robust... Wave was just really far ahead of its time but you see the modern incarnation in google docs and paper. This is like the infra to build spideroak on your own hardware. It's not the same as a service where you have to trust the operator.

SpiderOak is a Zero-Knowledge service. You don't have to trust them.

And you shouldn't.

I wanted to link to various people who have experienced data loss in SpiderOak (me included) due to bugs in the client which have gone unsolved for at least three years.

But....they seem to have redesigned their homepage and the forums that used to be available seem to have gone.

Here is one example though: https://spekxvision.wordpress.com/2015/10/13/more-spideroak-...

So I can only talk from a personal perspective and my experience with their CTO and support team. I've lost data on multiple occasions due to bugs in the client. This data was not recoverable. I've since switched to Crashplan and am much happier.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#132

Post by Merovius »

reitanqild wrote: post #122
enneff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are aware of kbfs, ipfs, and several other systems. There are many trade-offs one can make in this space, and I think Upspin's set of tradeoffs is somewhat unique. One reason we started this project instead of contributing to others is that it's not clear that the trade-offs made by extant systems are really working for users, at a fundamental level. Maybe Upspin's will, maybe they won't. We'll see. We wrote a bit…

Don't know if you are allowed to comment but: Is this an early sign of Google going back to its "not evil" roots or do I read too much into this? Edit: for context, I used to be a google fanboy and I still to sone degree recommend some of their products. I just got a bit fed up with the butchering of xmpp and possibly a few things I can't remember right now.

It's not a Google product. So no. (not that I'd agree with it not adhering to those roots currently. Just that this project has nothing to do with company policy)

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#134

Post by simonh »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #119
enneff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to register your public key with key.upspin.io in order to speak to any Upspin servers, so in that sense it is not "account free". You need to prove to others that you are who you say you are. There is an "all" permission that shares with the world (see https://upspin.io/doc/access_control.md ) but in most cases we expect people will share with a specific set of named users.

Will Upspin key servers be operated by a non-Google entity so as to allow the global filesystem to continue to function after Google decides to no longer support the project?

What happens when that non-Google entity decides to no longer support the project? Now you're dependent on two organisations continuing support instead of just one.

It sounds like the project code is all publisgedcthough, so it should be possible to operate a private or alternative upspin network.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#135

Post by Merovius »

Several questions, some minor, some major:

AIUI, the keyserver is centralized in two regards: a) if it's down, I can't access anyone's data and b) it centralizes trust, key.upspin.io has complete control over which key belongs to which person and where the data is, so it can just take over accounts. Why not use a federated model, e.g. putting the directory into the DNS or have the directory server listen on a well-defined port or something? Or, if you want the usability of not having the E-Mail hoster necessarily deal with upspin, do the federated thing first and if that fails, fall back to the centralized keyserver?

There seems to be a 1:1 mapping of usernames to keys, meaning I have to share my private key with all my devices. If one device gets lost or compromised, I now have to revoke my key and rotate it on all devices. Why not putting in a 1:n mapping of usernames to keys, so that each device gets its own key?

Why store the upspin-specific keys in ~/.ssh? I won't use them to ssh anywhere and there already is a perfectly fine directory ~/upspin for upspin-related data.

The way sharing works means, that storage for a file grows linearly with users that a file is shared with. This would seem to preclude from sharing files with large non-public audiences (say, I have a group for all employees of my company, or members of my hackerspace, or attendees of a conference…).

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#136

Post by Asooka »

StavrosK wrote: post #50
Asooka wrote: post #49

How do you deal with the piracy problem? What steps guarantee that I cannot share a copy of e.g. a movie I do not own via the service? Edit: google drive for example has a list of known hashes of pirate files and you can't share links to files matching those. I imagine something similar will be in effect here?

Why do they have to deal with the piracy problem?

Because it's 2017 already. We, as programmers, should strive to make ethical software that doesn't infringe others' rights. Even Google's core motto is "don't be evil". The RIAA and MPAA are the supporting pillars of our culture - if they go down, our own culture dies. Making software that facilitates eroding the foundations on which our culture is built, seems pretty evil to me. Leveraging your position as a too-big-to-fail software company to steal billions of profits from poor artists seems pretty damn evil to me.

I just want Google to be better - I want them making ethical software that respects people's rights, not havens for thieves.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#137

Post by stefanha »

Merovius wrote: post #135

Several questions, some minor, some major: AIUI, the keyserver is centralized in two regards: a) if it's down, I can't access anyone's data and b) it centralizes trust, key.upspin.io has complete control over which key belongs to which person and where the data is, so it can just take over accounts. Why not use a federated model, e.g. putting the directory into the DNS or have the directory server listen on a well-de…

The centralized keyserver puzzles me a little too but it does have some advantages:

1. The email address adds a layer of indirection on top of your upspin directory and storage server addresses. You can migrate upspin providers without changing your identifier in the global namespace.

2. The email address is instantly recognizable to friends and family. It's more user-friendly than introducing a separate decentralized upspin address (like Jabber IDs). You did mention a hybrid approach which uses the centralized keyserver as a fallback though.

A decentralized keyserver still seems more natural to me. Would be great to hear more on the reasoning from the creators of upspin.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#138

Post by zokier »

enneff wrote: post #102
scott00 wrote: post #84

Why no federation for key servers?

It'd be interesting to talk about how this might work.

SRV record for the domain part of the "email" address pointing to the key server for that domain. Isn't that the standard solution for this sort of thing?

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#139

Post by StavrosK »

Asooka wrote: post #136
StavrosK wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they have to deal with the piracy problem?

Because it's 2017 already. We, as programmers, should strive to make ethical software that doesn't infringe others' rights. Even Google's core motto is "don't be evil". The RIAA and MPAA are the supporting pillars of our culture - if they go down, our own culture dies. Making software that facilitates eroding the foundations on which our culture is built, seems pretty evil to me. Leveraging your position as a too-big…

Sorry, my question was more about the "they" than about the "why". Why does ZFS have an ethical responsibility to prevent you from saving a copyrighted file? Why does TCP have an ethical responsibility to prevent you from transmitting copyrighted data? Why do we have an ethical responsibility to build DRM into more things?

If the MPAA and RIAA can't find a business model that works without restricting my freedom, maybe they should go down, and maybe your culture should die.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#140

Post by ansgri »

lars_francke wrote: post #131
webmaven wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpiderOak is a Zero-Knowledge service. You don't have to trust them.

And you shouldn't. I wanted to link to various people who have experienced data loss in SpiderOak (me included) due to bugs in the client which have gone unsolved for at least three years. But....they seem to have redesigned their homepage and the forums that used to be available seem to have gone. Here is one example though: https://spekxvision.wordpress.com/2015/10/13/more-spideroak-... So I can only talk from a pe…

Agree, SpiderOak is far from good. Haven't yet experienced data loss, but their sync is very slow and, with custom synced folder (not the 'Hive' one) pretty unreliable.

From Crashplan's web page I don't see if they do file sync, what do you recommend for this domain? I'd use OneDrive, but supported Linux client is a must.

Post reply on HN