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

261–270 of 331 posts

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

#261

Post by mortos »

therealmarv wrote: post #77

Ente Auth https://auth.ente.io/ was my go to choice for migrating from Authy. It supports importing and exporting (so no dead end unlike Authy) and I can see the second factor on my desktop without reaching my phone (through Ente Auth website). I've exported from a rooted phone from Authy->Aegis->Ente Auth. I have no need for their main product but they are building amazing software!

Any reason to go with this over Aegis? It's not clear why I'd even want an account for a 2FA app, it feels like Aegis would be the better choice on that fact alone.

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

#262

Post by mortos »

sofixa wrote: post #160
mcfedr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is the reason. They make it impossible to compete, their apps have permissions no one else can have.

The EU is working on forcing their hand there via the Digital Services and Markets Acts.

And Apple has proven it will make those features exclusive to EU. And maybe even just disable those features.

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

#263

Post by vishnumohandas »

mortos wrote: post #261
therealmarv wrote: post #77

Ente Auth https://auth.ente.io/ was my go to choice for migrating from Authy. It supports importing and exporting (so no dead end unlike Authy) and I can see the second factor on my desktop without reaching my phone (through Ente Auth website). I've exported from a rooted phone from Authy->Aegis->Ente Auth. I have no need for their main product but they are building amazing software!

Any reason to go with this over Aegis? It's not clear why I'd even want an account for a 2FA app, it feels like Aegis would be the better choice on that fact alone.

Account creation is optional, and unlike Aegis, Ente is cross platform. The latter might not be relevant if you aren't opting into e2ee backups.

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

#264

Post by mortos »

archon810 wrote: post #228
therealmarv wrote: post #77

Ente Auth https://auth.ente.io/ was my go to choice for migrating from Authy. It supports importing and exporting (so no dead end unlike Authy) and I can see the second factor on my desktop without reaching my phone (through Ente Auth website). I've exported from a rooted phone from Authy->Aegis->Ente Auth. I have no need for their main product but they are building amazing software!

There's no landing page to describe what the heck I'm signing up for. This company makes some weird UX decisions.

From the response I got from the CEO, I'm assuming the expected discovery process is for users to start with the phone app.

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

#266

Post by marwis »

alisonatwork wrote: post #248
marwis wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is. Although seems only limited to Camera Roll folder. Perhaps this is why Samsung Camera built-in OneDrive integration uses different folder. Their mobile app is now stripping GPS on upload while files uploaded from desktop are unaffected. However the files I already had uploaded going back to 2017 were stripped. No idea if this was done server side or by the mobile client but the end effect is the same. Unl…

I haven't seen this behavior. All of my photos synced from Android to OneDrive have GPS data, as expected. I just checked a few from 2017 (Windows Phone) and 2018 (Android) and still there too. Did you see the same behavior on all your devices?

Looks like it's preserving them now (for newly backed up). I guess I was unlucky.

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

#267

Post by schnatterer »

ValentineC wrote: post #232
schnatterer wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One advantage Ente provides to a local NAS is geo redundancy. If your nas gets destroyed eg by fire or water or stolen eg by burglar or even the police your data is gone. Synology offers their convenient C2 service, but IIRC has or had some cryptographic weakness. So I hacked my own solution with rclone and some cheap cloud storage. Well, something like Ente would have been much more convenient.

> If your nas gets destroyed eg by fire or water or stolen eg by burglar or even the police your data is gone. Isn't this why offsite backups are important? Synology has Hyper Backup, and as you mentioned, there's also rclone. I personally think the biggest benefit to keeping photos as simple files (and maintaining my own offsite backups) is that I'm never at the mercy of one of the SaaS's microservices being down, f…

TBH I totally agree with the peace of mind argument You'll have to have the time and skills to get it, though. For my less teach-savy family and friends I always have been at a lost what to recommend. Here, a privacy friendly alternative is huge, IMO. I often recommended to use Google as backup, because it's better than no backup and easy to setup on Android.

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

#268

Post by krick »

Seriously, 500 GB is "most users"? I never actually measured how much space my photos take (I put the off the phone onto a NAS), but I would guess it must easily fit under 50 GB, or I should reconsider how I store them. And I don't consider myself as somebody who barely takes photos. Granted, I have no idea how those people who have instagram actually think, but I don't imagine I might need that much of photos to be constantly accessible on my phone (I mean, the point of these apps is to have them actually accessible on demand on your device, right?) For a "professional" 2TB is probably not quite enough as well, but then, why would a "professional" store their photos as JPEGs on a Google Photos alternative? But otherwise, I might dump all my photos from Ente on a drive just in case, but to store in the cloud just actually nice photos, all dups removed. How would I ever exceed 50 GB this way?

So, what's the catch? Is 500 GB photos on Google Drive actually "most users"? Is there something with that service that would prevent me from staying within 50 GB? Like, maybe it's impossible to delete a photo later on? This is a serious question, 500 GB of photos for "most users" seems absolutely nuts to me.

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

#269

Post by draven »

krick wrote: post #268

Seriously, 500 GB is "most users"? I never actually measured how much space my photos take (I put the off the phone onto a NAS), but I would guess it must easily fit under 50 GB, or I should reconsider how I store them. And I don't consider myself as somebody who barely takes photos. Granted, I have no idea how those people who have instagram actually think, but I don't imagine I might need that much of photos to be…

The page says "Every plan can be shared with your family."

In that case I guess 500GB make sense.

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

#270

Post by nprateem »

Sayrus wrote: post #168
contrarian1234 wrote: post #156

I don't really get the business model. An open source stack makes sense for products targeted towards programmers. Out of curiosity I checked Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/plans/storage 9 USD per month gives you 2TB storage (vs. 500GB here) I don't really get what justifies the 4x price (some of the features look like what you can get from a Gallery app like Aves) So it's looking kinda DOA to me. The intersection…

> I don't really get the business model. An open source stack makes sense for products targeted towards programmers. > Most people that back up their pics in ~the cloud~ won't have the technical skills to do self-host Which is why they are offering a managed service as well. Even people with the technical skills are not always inclined to selfhost. > With Dropbox I guess you could accomplish the same, but you'd need…

The GP isn't undermining it, they're talking about the strength of the need. Clearly someone facing threat of punishment has a greater need for encryption than those who aren't.

Obviously there's a question of whether people in the latter group may end up in the former, perhaps by mistake, but would that risk be sufficient to make them pay 4x?

Post reply on HN