3 ms·

To be fair, Chrome has exactly that feature to, and let's the user choose what they want.

Sylos 10y ago
Is Chrome's sync not a blob? I tried to find information about it online, but the official documentation [0] is less than helpful to say the least. I'm guessing when they say "stuff", that's a euphemism for blob, but fuck if I know, maybe they are just trying to be hip in their documentation. After all, it's also business time, in case you didn't know. Currently downloading the Chromium source code, to see if that's more helpful, but I kind of doubt it... [0]: https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/sync https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/sync
- timothya 10y ago
  I think the official documentation is what's found in the help center; this page contains a lot more information about using a custom passphrase for your sync data: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035?hl=en (top result when searching for "chrome sync encrypted").
- lmns 10y ago
  At least in the Debian builds of Chromium the sync component is included. So I guess it's open source?
- Sylos 10y ago
  Alright, status report. The official documentation talks about the folders /chrome/browser/sync/engine, /chrome/browser/sync/syncable and /chrome/browser/sync/protocol. These folders are missing from the source tree, as you can see here: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/chrome/browser/sync/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/... However, I decided to give the benefit of the doubt and did a few file-searches, in case the files were moved at some point and the documentation was just not updated. And it seems like that's actually the case. The folder /sync contains all three missing folders (engine, syncable, protocol) and more: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/sync/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/...
fauigerzigerk 10y ago
But Google has created a perverse incentive here. They give me a ton of choices, so many and so vaguely explained that I couldn't possibly understand what they really mean and I get suspicous of everything they offer me. So what I do is disable everything without even thinking. Later when something isn't working as expected and it turns out it's because of one of those privacy settings, I start to think about whether or not I really need it. So effectively, they give me an incentive to summarily reverse their opt-out strategy into an opt-in one. I suppose that's fine with them because most people won't do even that. However, they should be aware of the fact that this is the second easiest thing to do after leaving everything enabled. Over time, they may be creating a popular culture of "disable everything" just like they created a culture of ad-blocking (where "they" is the whole advertising industry in this case, not so much Google itself)
- makomk 10y ago
  Google also has an obnoxious "if we can't keep it, you can't either" approach to user data. For example, I have location history turned off for obvious reasons and tried using the Google Maps app. I wound up having to re-enter my destination several times due to accidentally doing something that cancelled the navigation and caused it to instantly forget the destination. As another example, Google's new Allo messaging app supports end-to-end encryption but it's not on by default and activating it blocks local logging - if they can't get a copy of your chat history and use it to work out stuff about you, they won't let you have one either.
  - pilif 10y ago
    If they did support keeping the history but only using it for you, it would be even harder for them to credibly prove that they are not keeping the history for advertisement purposes ("I have disabled you keeping any location history and still you list the places I have been to? How dare you??"). I can understand your point about allo more, though of course storing the local history unencrypted also means that it's going to be accessible to interested third parties in one way or another. If they don't keep it at all, it means that it won't be.
  - 10y ago
whyagaindavid 10y ago
Chrome does not have self-hosted server feature.
- SquareWheel 10y ago
  It does, but it's poorly documented and quite difficult to use. Use the flag --sync-url="" when launching Chrome, and I believe the server is run through chromiumsync.py.
  - ge0rg 10y ago
    Does that also work for the Android build? Sounds like an incentive to finally try out sync...
    - SquareWheel 10y ago
      It looks like it's doable with a rooted device. See section "Setting Flags for Chrome on Android". http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/run-chromium-with-flags http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/run-chromium-with... A successful experiment may be deserving of a blog post.

Sylos 10y ago

Is Chrome's sync not a blob? I tried to find information about it online, but the official documentation [0] is less than helpful to say the least. I'm guessing when they say "stuff", that's a euphemism for blob, but fuck if I know, maybe they are just trying to be hip in their documentation. After all, it's also business time, in case you didn't know. Currently downloading the Chromium source code, to see if that's more helpful, but I kind of doubt it... [0]: https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/sync https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/sync

timothya 10y ago
I think the official documentation is what's found in the help center; this page contains a lot more information about using a custom passphrase for your sync data: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/1181035?hl=en (top result when searching for "chrome sync encrypted").
lmns 10y ago
At least in the Debian builds of Chromium the sync component is included. So I guess it's open source?
Sylos 10y ago
Alright, status report. The official documentation talks about the folders /chrome/browser/sync/engine, /chrome/browser/sync/syncable and /chrome/browser/sync/protocol. These folders are missing from the source tree, as you can see here: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/chrome/browser/sync/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/... However, I decided to give the benefit of the doubt and did a few file-searches, in case the files were moved at some point and the documentation was just not updated. And it seems like that's actually the case. The folder /sync contains all three missing folders (engine, syncable, protocol) and more: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/sync/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/master/...

fauigerzigerk 10y ago

But Google has created a perverse incentive here. They give me a ton of choices, so many and so vaguely explained that I couldn't possibly understand what they really mean and I get suspicous of everything they offer me. So what I do is disable everything without even thinking. Later when something isn't working as expected and it turns out it's because of one of those privacy settings, I start to think about whether or not I really need it. So effectively, they give me an incentive to summarily reverse their opt-out strategy into an opt-in one. I suppose that's fine with them because most people won't do even that. However, they should be aware of the fact that this is the second easiest thing to do after leaving everything enabled. Over time, they may be creating a popular culture of "disable everything" just like they created a culture of ad-blocking (where "they" is the whole advertising industry in this case, not so much Google itself)

makomk 10y ago
Google also has an obnoxious "if we can't keep it, you can't either" approach to user data. For example, I have location history turned off for obvious reasons and tried using the Google Maps app. I wound up having to re-enter my destination several times due to accidentally doing something that cancelled the navigation and caused it to instantly forget the destination. As another example, Google's new Allo messaging app supports end-to-end encryption but it's not on by default and activating it blocks local logging - if they can't get a copy of your chat history and use it to work out stuff about you, they won't let you have one either.
- pilif 10y ago
  If they did support keeping the history but only using it for you, it would be even harder for them to credibly prove that they are not keeping the history for advertisement purposes ("I have disabled you keeping any location history and still you list the places I have been to? How dare you??"). I can understand your point about allo more, though of course storing the local history unencrypted also means that it's going to be accessible to interested third parties in one way or another. If they don't keep it at all, it means that it won't be.
- 10y ago

whyagaindavid 10y ago

Chrome does not have self-hosted server feature.

SquareWheel 10y ago
It does, but it's poorly documented and quite difficult to use. Use the flag --sync-url="" when launching Chrome, and I believe the server is run through chromiumsync.py.
- ge0rg 10y ago
  Does that also work for the Android build? Sounds like an incentive to finally try out sync...
  - SquareWheel 10y ago
    It looks like it's doable with a rooted device. See section "Setting Flags for Chrome on Android". http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/run-chromium-with-flags http://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/run-chromium-with... A successful experiment may be deserving of a blog post.