4 ms·

Once again, I would like to recommend Tahoe-LAFS [0] (which anyone can install on their own on their servers or use the paid service from the creators of Tahoe-

by vu3rdd 12y ago

Once again, I would like to recommend Tahoe-LAFS [0] (which anyone can install on their own on their servers or use the paid service from the creators of Tahoe-LAFS [1]). One can even store "shares" securely on Google Drive and Dropbox though it is a bit involved. [0] http://tahoe-lafs.org/ http://tahoe-lafs.org/ [1] https://leastauthority.com/ https://leastauthority.com/

anonbanker 12y ago
More importantly, you can host the storage over i2p, or a hybrid of clearnet and darknet. There's even an implement ion of free net over i2p using tahoe-lafs. I have assisted a few people in implementing this for their storage needs. No complaints, either.
newscracker 12y ago
Premise: I'm not interested in setting up a server and maintaining it, but I am interested in storing my data on services that can promise, or even better, guarantee, privacy and security. I have looked at Tahoe-LAFS for a few years now, along with the paid service. In my observations over the last few years, the paid service is getting almost zero attention from the creators. Initially they had it at an enormous cost (like $1 per GB per month) compared to other competitors. In the recent times it has moved to other schemes that are still expensive for many people ($25 per month). Their products, or rather services, are rarely updated and remain in the TBA (to be announced) status for far too long while other competitors (the "privacy conscious" ones like SpiderOak that cannot truly guarantee it like Tahoe-LAFS can as well as the "what's privacy?" services like Dropbox, Crashplan, Box, Google, Microsoft and Apple, to name just a few) are moving ahead much faster and bringing down prices. I'm willing to pay a decent enough premium to help privacy guaranteeing services survive and thrive, but this kind of pricing and sluggishness in introducing services from leastauthority.com makes it seem like they don't really want many users to sign up.

by vu3rdd 12y ago

anonbanker 12y ago

More importantly, you can host the storage over i2p, or a hybrid of clearnet and darknet. There's even an implement ion of free net over i2p using tahoe-lafs. I have assisted a few people in implementing this for their storage needs. No complaints, either.

newscracker 12y ago

Premise: I'm not interested in setting up a server and maintaining it, but I am interested in storing my data on services that can promise, or even better, guarantee, privacy and security. I have looked at Tahoe-LAFS for a few years now, along with the paid service. In my observations over the last few years, the paid service is getting almost zero attention from the creators. Initially they had it at an enormous cost (like $1 per GB per month) compared to other competitors. In the recent times it has moved to other schemes that are still expensive for many people ($25 per month). Their products, or rather services, are rarely updated and remain in the TBA (to be announced) status for far too long while other competitors (the "privacy conscious" ones like SpiderOak that cannot truly guarantee it like Tahoe-LAFS can as well as the "what's privacy?" services like Dropbox, Crashplan, Box, Google, Microsoft and Apple, to name just a few) are moving ahead much faster and bringing down prices. I'm willing to pay a decent enough premium to help privacy guaranteeing services survive and thrive, but this kind of pricing and sluggishness in introducing services from leastauthority.com makes it seem like they don't really want many users to sign up.