Thanks for the feedback. For what it's worth, we did try a bunch of alternative wordings, and Zero Knowledge was the phrase that non technologists found most accessible. We prioritized making the explanation clear to non-experts vs. to the community of cryptographers.
I'd like to propose "Zero Access", as in zero access to the plaintext.
They could go with "Know nothing".
(Or "Jon Snow", for short, if they can get away with it without being sued - "Jon S. crypto, we dont know nuthing" ;-)
does anybody know if www.sync.com is any better regarding their mobile apps ? They do also client-site,end-to-end encryption but their white paper only mentions their web-app which apparently does everything on the client.
You should also check out Tresor End to End Encryption [1] https://tresorit.com/
Disclaimer: This is a promotional post with an intention to pass on Reseller Discounts so that we have more individuals who can subscribe to secured cloud storage
As part of ensuring that our business clients have access to secured cloud storage services, we have initiated enlisting with Tresorit as Resellers and will be passing on discounts* to our clients.
Interested individuals can procure the service at a discounted rate subject to the total number of individuals registering and converting as a paid users is 250 or above
Please leave your email id and we will contact you if we area able to enlist the required number of individuals
Spider Oak - Please stop describing your service as "Zero Knowledge" unless and until you deploy a service that is actually is. E2E encryption great, but it is not the same thing.
SpiderOak founder here... A few cryptographers have noticed SpiderOak's marketing term Zero Knowledge is inconsistent with the academic definition. Maybe it doesn't mean what we think it means[1]? SpiderOak was one of the first companies to use this phrase commercially and the need has only grown stronger. At the heart of the issue is the difficulty for end users to decipher the terms cloud vendors use to describe th…
My main beef with SpiderOak is that I have no way of verifying these claims, so why should I use it over, say, Crashplan, which actually does do a better job of backup. I'll just use a tool like Veracrypt when I need the extra layer of protection, and Crashplan does a better job of incremental backup of these files, too, while SpiderOak uploads the entire file each time.