3 ms·

I'm uncomfortable about the opacity of BTsync's privacy architecture. AFAIK even the protocol isn't documented. The code obviously isn't open source. I wouldn'

by taway2012 13y ago

I'm uncomfortable about the opacity of BTsync's privacy architecture. AFAIK even the protocol isn't documented. The code obviously isn't open source. I wouldn't use it sync anything except Truecrypt volumes. :)

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
AsymetricCom 13y ago
On top of that (literally and figuratively) is Pi's ARM's TrustZone hypervisor..
jewel 13y ago
This is the same issue I have with btsync, so about a month ago I started working on an open-source clone, with similar features but an open, documented protocol. https://github.com/jewel/clearskies https://github.com/jewel/clearskies
- schabernakk 13y ago
  best of luck. i really hope you succeed with this. it seems that right now all opensource dropbox alternatives, while great, have a shortcoming somewhere (git annex, sparkleshare, btsync...)
- reustle 13y ago
  I'm looking forward to clearskies and will gladly switch over to it once it's ready!
mahyarm 13y ago
Or encfs, a per file encrypted filesystem.
- bigiain 13y ago
  I'm using BTSync with EncFS, but if you don't trust the BTSync binary – it's probably got access to the non-encrypted data as well unless you've jumped through a few more hoops than a "typical BTSync installation". I'd guess 99.9% of BTSync users have the binary installed with at least enough permissions to read anything the logged in user can read (which includes the cleartext-mounted stuff in your EncFS or TrueCrypt volumes).
djjaxe 13y ago
though BTsync is "meant for large files" I wouldn't really advise syncing truecrypt files as it syncs the entire file not just updating lines in the file... (though that would probably be much more efficient) even still using truecrypt would still require entire file syncs the second anything changed. :/ maybe instead encrypt each file separately using AES... might be slightly better as you won't be syncing whole gigs of files if you only changed a small text file...

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

AsymetricCom 13y ago

On top of that (literally and figuratively) is Pi's ARM's TrustZone hypervisor..

jewel 13y ago

This is the same issue I have with btsync, so about a month ago I started working on an open-source clone, with similar features but an open, documented protocol. https://github.com/jewel/clearskies https://github.com/jewel/clearskies

schabernakk 13y ago
best of luck. i really hope you succeed with this. it seems that right now all opensource dropbox alternatives, while great, have a shortcoming somewhere (git annex, sparkleshare, btsync...)
reustle 13y ago
I'm looking forward to clearskies and will gladly switch over to it once it's ready!

mahyarm 13y ago

Or encfs, a per file encrypted filesystem.

bigiain 13y ago
I'm using BTSync with EncFS, but if you don't trust the BTSync binary – it's probably got access to the non-encrypted data as well unless you've jumped through a few more hoops than a "typical BTSync installation". I'd guess 99.9% of BTSync users have the binary installed with at least enough permissions to read anything the logged in user can read (which includes the cleartext-mounted stuff in your EncFS or TrueCrypt volumes).

djjaxe 13y ago

though BTsync is "meant for large files" I wouldn't really advise syncing truecrypt files as it syncs the entire file not just updating lines in the file... (though that would probably be much more efficient) even still using truecrypt would still require entire file syncs the second anything changed. :/ maybe instead encrypt each file separately using AES... might be slightly better as you won't be syncing whole gigs of files if you only changed a small text file...