4 ms·
Immutable backup solutions are code and thus eventually defeatable from the remote attackers point of view. Yeah, but an attacker is unlikely to compromise bot
by microtonal 1mo ago
Immutable backup solutions are code and thus eventually defeatable from the remote attackers point of view.
Yeah, but an attacker is unlikely to compromise both you and your storage provider at the same point. Many S3-compatible storage providers (e.g. Backblaze and Hetzner) support object lock, where you can lock objects for a certain number of days (and refresh locks if the objects are still used in recent backups). Typically object locks are implemented such that not even you yourself can remove the data from the account settings.
E.g. when I cancelled my Backblaze B2 account, I had to wait until the object locks expired before I could remove the remaining data and delete the account.
Arq on macOS has great support for object locks BTW.
- cm2187 1mo agoBut a malware will scan for anything that looks like some credentials on your machine. So if you have a script with clear credentials backing up to a ftp server, the malware will go after the backup. At the end of the day it depends on what is your threat model. Mine is 1) automated malwares and 2) my own fuckups. I am not trying to prevent the NSA from hacking me. Against an automated malware, custom scripts with encrypted credentials that don't show in clear in command lines or environment variables are probably good enough.
- 7bit 1mo agoHave you not read the comment you reply to?