Live data from Hacker News

Upspin – Another option for file sharing

security.googleblog.com

81–90 of 170 posts

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#81
The only thing I dislike about this idea is that it appears to be another centralised service.

Why can't we come up with something similar but using HTTPS and Public Key Infrastructure that I can host on my own server but still be interoperable?

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#82
post #81

The only thing I dislike about this idea is that it appears to be another centralised service. Why can't we come up with something similar but using HTTPS and Public Key Infrastructure that I can host on my own server but still be interoperable?

I don't think you fully read how it works. It said the storage providers etc can be self hosted.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#83
A critical part of storage for non-techies is having great search. However, in this case, since blobs are encrypted, the server cannot index them: it does not hold the private keys. It requires the client to make a full copy of the files locally to index them (and presumably re-index them when a different client modifies them?)

Has any thought been given on that?

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, Camlistore author here. Andrew Gerrand worked with me on Camlistore too and is one of the Upspin authors. The main difference I see is that Camlistore can model POSIX filesystems for backup and FUSE, but that's not its preferred view of the world. It is perfectly happy modeling a tweet or a "like" on its own, without any name in the world. Upspin's data model is very much a traditional filesystem. Also, upspin ca…

Would it make sense to provide an upspin server interface to Camlistore?

Seems inevitable. :)

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#86
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…

Does upspin have a known "set of tradeoffs [that are] somewhat unique" or does the community need to flesh them out? High-level bullets would be nice.

We haven't written the docs. That's what the issue I linked in the parent post is about.

Re: Upspin – Another option for file sharing

#87
post #12

I noted the disclaimer: "Upspin is not an official Google product". Yet it is announced on the Google Blog? Is it a separate "skunk works" team effort? Also, I note that they can set access levels based on email addresses, but I am unsure how that would work? Would those emails have to be linked to a Google account so that Upspin could check the currently logged in Google account to allow/disallow access to the files…

Upspin is one of Google's many Open Source projects. It's not really skunkworks, per se, just something that we wanted to work on and were lucky enough to be supported by Google in doing so. The email addresses are Upspin user names whose public keys are registered with a central server, key.upspin.io. To act as an Upspin client, you need to sign up: https://upspin.io/doc/signup.md Requests made by Upspin users are s…

This doesn't really clarify what an "unofficial" Google project is. Does it mean that people don't work on it full-time and it's a 20% project? Does it mean that it was developed at home without using Google's resources, so they don't have an ownership interest in it, but they are letting it be hosted on their infrastructure and announced on their blog to be nice? Does it mean that Google isn't sure how long it will want to continue to contribute resources? Does it mean that support is only available on an ad-hoc basis (isn't that the case with all free Google products)? Does it mean that serious customers shouldn't rely on it to work reliably? Does it not really mean anything, and just thrown on there for legal protection (against what?)?
Post reply on HN