3 ms·

You wouldn't have to trust them if they made the client open source. It still baffles me that they're aren't doing that given that their entire sales pitch is a

by simias 10y ago

You wouldn't have to trust them if they made the client open source. It still baffles me that they're aren't doing that given that their entire sales pitch is about security and privacy and "no knowledge". I'm a paying customer and I use SpiderOak for some non-critical backup/synchronization tasks but I refrain from using it for anything sensitive because of this. I'd also like to be able to hack the client to remove all the cruft I don't need, it's not exactly pleasant to use currently. On linux I'd actually prefer a good CLI over the weird GUI we have now.

rarrrrrr 10y ago
Thank you for the feedback and we'll be working on it! FYI, many people do use SpiderOak exclusively from the command line. It's fairly scriptable. Here's the command line options: https://spideroak.com/faq/how-can-i-use-spideroak-from-the-command-line https://spideroak.com/faq/how-can-i-use-spideroak-from-the-c... Also, the source code for our other products (Encryptr, Semaphor) is published. SpiderOakONE was first developed in 2006 and open source business models were not so popular at the time. It's been much harder than I thought it would be to make SpiderOakONE open source but one glorious day we will get there. https://spideroak.com/solutions/semaphor/source https://spideroak.com/solutions/semaphor/source