3 ms·

I get the feeling, but rationally, that would be equivalent to a company that simply promises (say, in the Terms of Service) not to mess with your data. I may

I get the feeling, but rationally, that would be equivalent to a company that simply promises (say, in the Terms of Service) not to mess with your data. I may actually trust a company on such promises, but the real risk is in this scenario: the company goes bust and some weirdos seize control of the server. In that situation, it doesn't matter much that the data is encrypted, if the keys are available too.

lukev 17y ago
This could be alleviated if the server kept the user's key only on a per-session basis and never actually stored it. I'm curious... how would you feel about that? Also, there might be a way to make a server transparent so people are more likely to trust it... open-source the server code, of course, and expose the entire file system as read-only could people could run a checksum on the server executable to verify it's the same one? Of course there'd ultimately be no guarantee that there wasn't networking trickery going on...