4 ms·

Dropbox works brilliantly for sharing/syncing non-private files, but I don't think it makes sense to try to patch on something to make it work for truly private

by masnick 15y ago

Dropbox works brilliantly for sharing/syncing non-private files, but I don't think it makes sense to try to patch on something to make it work for truly private files. In my experience, the added security of encryption always comes with some inconvenience, but TrueCrypt volumes sound really inconvenient (like dealing with conflicts if the volume was mounted on multiple computers at the same time). I'd rather lose the convenience of the web interface, etc. and have locally encrypted files that are only accessible to me. What about adding encryption on top of a tool like lipsync (https://github.com/philcryer/lipsync https://github.com/philcryer/lipsync) as an alternative to Dropbox for private files?

gnoupi 15y ago
The issue with Dropbox recently is that for 4 hours, there was no password check. So it's not as much to protect public/shared files, but to protect all files you have on Dropbox, in the eventuality someone gets full access to your account.
- masnick 15y ago
  Right, but you should have been assuming all along that your Dropbox files could be made public given that they are not locally encrypted. The recent security breach just drives home this point. My point is that we need something like Dropbox but with local encryption. Putting a TrueCrypt volume on Dropbox isn't a practical solution, IMHO.
  - gnoupi 15y ago
    Yes, of course. From your previous messages it was looking like you were assuming that private files were "safe", that's why I wanted to add the detail. I agree as well on the need for an encrypted solution. I'm surprised that Dropbox hasn't been proposing this already. Well, unless they intend to have access to the contents, themselves..
    - masnick 15y ago
      Yes, I would love to see a built-in feature for designating a folder in Dropbox as "super private", e.g. encryption happens on the client side and there is no web interface or ability to share subfolders. Until that happens, I'm looking for a non-Dropbox alternative for syncing files I would prefer remained private.

by masnick 15y ago

gnoupi 15y ago

The issue with Dropbox recently is that for 4 hours, there was no password check. So it's not as much to protect public/shared files, but to protect all files you have on Dropbox, in the eventuality someone gets full access to your account.

masnick 15y ago
Right, but you should have been assuming all along that your Dropbox files could be made public given that they are not locally encrypted. The recent security breach just drives home this point. My point is that we need something like Dropbox but with local encryption. Putting a TrueCrypt volume on Dropbox isn't a practical solution, IMHO.
- gnoupi 15y ago
  Yes, of course. From your previous messages it was looking like you were assuming that private files were "safe", that's why I wanted to add the detail. I agree as well on the need for an encrypted solution. I'm surprised that Dropbox hasn't been proposing this already. Well, unless they intend to have access to the contents, themselves..
  - masnick 15y ago
    Yes, I would love to see a built-in feature for designating a folder in Dropbox as "super private", e.g. encryption happens on the client side and there is no web interface or ability to share subfolders. Until that happens, I'm looking for a non-Dropbox alternative for syncing files I would prefer remained private.