5 ms·

+1 if you are storing objects uncompressed, I'd be amazed if AWS doesn't compress them and charge you for the full space anyway

• sitkack 4y ago
  If this true, there is possibly a side channel one could run against object storage to determine if someone else in the content-addressable-store has the same files. Like when it was easy to file share on dropbox by having the correct hashes. A GUID could summon a 1GB file.
  • staticassertion 4y ago
    That assumes cross-tenant compression.
  • eurg 4y ago
    Compression and content-addressing are two separate things. Content addressing across accounts on private, AWS encrypted S3 buckets would run counter to their claims.
  • alexchamberlain 4y ago
    A couple of comments across the thread have made similar points, but if I were implementing this, the "client metadata" like the incoming sha256 etc would be implemented a layer higher than the actual byte storage, so the byte storage could be compressed without any impact on that sort of thing.