5 ms·

>(With the exception of things like tarsnap). The chain of trust still extends to them. You're trusting that they're actually doing everything they say they'r

by cube13 13y ago

>(With the exception of things like tarsnap). The chain of trust still extends to them. You're trusting that they're actually doing everything they say they're doing. If you don't own the hardware and the building where the hardware is, you have to trust that they're doing everything you want them to be doing.

jmillikin 13y ago
> The chain of trust still extends to them. You're > trusting that they're actually doing everything > they say they're doing. Tarsnap performs encryption in the client, which is distributed only as source code. If you audit the client sufficiently to believe it is properly encrypting your data, then there is no need to trust the server or the hosting provider.
- tytso 13y ago
  Sure, if you are willing to do all of the computation on the client, and only use the server as a place to store an encrypted bag of bits. If you have a sufficiently fast network connection (or enough local disk cache and the ability to predict what you will need before you drop off your high speed network access), that can work. But there will be a lot of things that you may have gotten accustomed to if you operate in such a paradigm.
- sneak 13y ago
  You still have to trust them and their government when you use the service. They (or their government) could delete or compel the deletion of the files, have or cause outages, etc. Also, all the crypto in the world doesn't keep a service from logging (ip, timestamp) tuples each time you access them. You can do a lot with metadata.
  - JoachimSchipper 13y ago
    > You can do a lot with metadata. With GMail metadata, yes; with Tarsnap metadata, much less so.
pygy_ 13y ago
Tarsnap encrypts the data on the client side[0]. The source is open, and signed with PGP. The data ends up being stored on S3, but the location doesn't matter. [0] https://www.tarsnap.com/crypto.html https://www.tarsnap.com/crypto.html
tomkarlo 13y ago
Yes, but almost every provider is going to tell you up front that they will comply with requests from the government. If they then do that, there's no violation of trust.
- mpyne 13y ago
  Even cperciva notes that. He even says he might well turn over information without making it a knock-down/drag-out fight, if he believes the request is reasonable. And its all in his ToS. FWIW I agree completely with that viewpoint, so this is not a criticism.

by cube13 13y ago

jmillikin 13y ago

> The chain of trust still extends to them. You're > trusting that they're actually doing everything > they say they're doing. Tarsnap performs encryption in the client, which is distributed only as source code. If you audit the client sufficiently to believe it is properly encrypting your data, then there is no need to trust the server or the hosting provider.

tytso 13y ago
Sure, if you are willing to do all of the computation on the client, and only use the server as a place to store an encrypted bag of bits. If you have a sufficiently fast network connection (or enough local disk cache and the ability to predict what you will need before you drop off your high speed network access), that can work. But there will be a lot of things that you may have gotten accustomed to if you operate in such a paradigm.
sneak 13y ago
You still have to trust them and their government when you use the service. They (or their government) could delete or compel the deletion of the files, have or cause outages, etc. Also, all the crypto in the world doesn't keep a service from logging (ip, timestamp) tuples each time you access them. You can do a lot with metadata.
- JoachimSchipper 13y ago
  > You can do a lot with metadata. With GMail metadata, yes; with Tarsnap metadata, much less so.

pygy_ 13y ago

Tarsnap encrypts the data on the client side[0]. The source is open, and signed with PGP. The data ends up being stored on S3, but the location doesn't matter. [0] https://www.tarsnap.com/crypto.html https://www.tarsnap.com/crypto.html

tomkarlo 13y ago

Yes, but almost every provider is going to tell you up front that they will comply with requests from the government. If they then do that, there's no violation of trust.

mpyne 13y ago
Even cperciva notes that. He even says he might well turn over information without making it a knock-down/drag-out fight, if he believes the request is reasonable. And its all in his ToS. FWIW I agree completely with that viewpoint, so this is not a criticism.