21–30 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A big thing is that Tahoe LAFS can be run on untrusted computers.
So you share your data on untrusted machines that you bet will live long enough to hold what you want to keep. Sounds risky. Do storage providers have an incentive to provide the service reliably à la filecoin? [0] [0] https://filecoin.io/
Yes, via a currency called Dollars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tarsnap's target audience is sysadmins and other UNIXy gurus. My grandma and my dad, who would benifit most from a secure sync mechanism would probably be unable to use it. Also, I'm not sure how you can use tarsnap at good cost for p2p sync. [0] https://www.tarsnap.com/
time for me to make a tarsnap gui ?? XD
FWIW, I've been using syncthing [0] for some years now [1] and am very pleased. Even though my data is unavailable on the cloud from any untrusted computer (like e.g. my corporate laptop), it's synced on my "fleet". I'm not sure that PrivateStorage actually adds anything to the equation? EDIT> The Tahoe LAFS [2] model is more that you spread your data over multiple providers. NAS at home, several VPS providers, or wh…
Tahoe-LAFS makes some impressive claims like maintaining confidentiality while running on untrusted machines. I think a lot of folks now would assert that really any machine running x86 due to Intel ME and the AMD equivalent should in fact be untrusted.
I'm not in a position to criticize though, this is just from a cursory glance at the summary page, and frankly I used PIA as my own VPN provider for a number of years and had only positive experiences.
Based in the US apparently. I guess everyone here knows what that means. Not a great jurisdiction if you are concerned by privacy.
There are a number of alternative paths in this space if you're truly focused and willing to invest a bit, but if you care about privacy enough to seek a service like this out and just want to minimize mental overhead, this seems like a good choice. Tahoe-LAFS makes some impressive claims like maintaining confidentiality while running on untrusted machines. I think a lot of folks now would assert that really any mach…
> Tahoe-LAFS makes some impressive claims like maintaining confidentiality while running on untrusted machines. I think a lot of folks now would assert that really any machine running x86 due to Intel ME and the AMD equivalent should in fact be untrusted.
To be precise, our claim is that you can use untrusted servers, since the client encrypts the data before it leaves your machine. You are, of course, entirely reliant on your own client being trustworthy. Nothing can save you if your client is compromised, whether via ME, a BIOS infection, an OS rootkit, or a boring old userspace compromise.
The Tahoe-LAFS client runs pretty well on ARM and Raspberry PIs, in case that feels better.