3 ms·

No, you are not alone. I too would live to find a solution so that I can share photos and updates with my family and friends and still own the data. My ideal s

by junto 12y ago

No, you are not alone. I too would live to find a solution so that I can share photos and updates with my family and friends and still own the data. My ideal setup would be the photos encrypted at rest in Amazon S3 and a simple Google+ style photos masonry and albums app (Wordpress style install) that are locked down. Files can be shared on Facebook and other social networks but only as iframed embeds a bit like Wickr https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/01/30/facebook-to-fill-with-more-kittens-in-wickrs-message-hiding-scheme/ https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/01/30/facebook-to-fill... All my data. I control it. I can share it. Code open source. Openphoto that became TroveBox that then failed and open sourced it's code is probably the closest to what I want, except it is missing the Wickr style sharing and the encrypted at rest parts.

madeofpalk 12y ago
> My ideal setup would be the photos encrypted at rest in Amazon S3 Aren't your photos still in the 'cloud'? What's the difference between Amazon S3 and Apple's servers?
- comex 12y ago
  I expect the "code open source" bit implies that it is client side encryption, unlike current consumer products where such data is not encrypted or can be decrypted without the user's consent.
- ghshephard 12y ago
  ...Particularly given how much of Amazon's servers Apple seems to use, if Little Snitch is at all accurate.
- junto 12y ago
  They would be encrypted. The point is privacy. Icloud gives you none. In 10 years time the NSA are going to be sucking up every single photo and email and Facebook post they can, storing it for posterity in Utah, analysing every single one, facial recognition and categorisation automatically. They can have mine encrypted.
  - towelrod 12y ago
    In 10 years time, the NSA will be able to decrypt anything that is encrypted with 2015 encryption. And that's assuming they can't decrypt it now. Privacy is important, but let's be honest, you basically can't hide from the NSA.
    - icebraining 12y ago
      In 10 years time, the NSA will be able to decrypt anything that is encrypted with 2015 encryption. Will they? The standard ten years ago was AES-128/256. Are they able to decrypt it now?
    - veidr 12y ago
      That is probably not true -- there are a lot of things that we encrypted in 2005 that they still probably cannot decrypt today. More to the point, the NSA definitely can't decrypt everything that was encrypted a decade ago. They may be able to decrypt certain things that have somehow caught their interest. Generally, it still makes sense for all of us to encrypt by default. But OTOH a central feature of these photo services is 'easily share pics with anybody you want', so obviously they need the plaintext data to do that. I agree with junto that I would like encryption options, but I use these services anyhow because my photos just really aren't as interesting as when I was young -- mainly 100s of nearly-identical shots of babies drooling. In one sense, the NSA can have the photos of my toddler; who gives a shit. OTOH, though, it will suck when the shitty face recognition algorithms they are datamining with in 5 years generate a partial match between my son eating a rag and Jihadi John, and the feds come kick in the door to my house in the middle of the night and shoot my dog before anybody realizes what's happening... so yeah, I would just rather have it all encrypted by default.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - fit2rule 12y ago
    The NSA already have been doing this for 15 years. Any picture that goes on the wire, to any cloud or other service, is in their system..
reedlaw 12y ago
I just started using git-annex to backup my photos to Amazon Glacier. It's really powerful in that it allows you to specify the minimum number of backup copies, whether or not to "trust" a remote repo, and can automatically sync files that have fewer than the minimum number of copies. It also supports encryption using either your own GPG key or a generated one that stays in your local annex repos.
uptown 12y ago
Take a look at Koken. http://koken.me/ http://koken.me/ It's an awesome (and free) way to self-host your own photo album. Sounds like it'd solve at least part of your dream setup.

by junto 12y ago

madeofpalk 12y ago

> My ideal setup would be the photos encrypted at rest in Amazon S3 Aren't your photos still in the 'cloud'? What's the difference between Amazon S3 and Apple's servers?

comex 12y ago
I expect the "code open source" bit implies that it is client side encryption, unlike current consumer products where such data is not encrypted or can be decrypted without the user's consent.
ghshephard 12y ago
...Particularly given how much of Amazon's servers Apple seems to use, if Little Snitch is at all accurate.
junto 12y ago
They would be encrypted. The point is privacy. Icloud gives you none. In 10 years time the NSA are going to be sucking up every single photo and email and Facebook post they can, storing it for posterity in Utah, analysing every single one, facial recognition and categorisation automatically. They can have mine encrypted.
- towelrod 12y ago
  In 10 years time, the NSA will be able to decrypt anything that is encrypted with 2015 encryption. And that's assuming they can't decrypt it now. Privacy is important, but let's be honest, you basically can't hide from the NSA.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    In 10 years time, the NSA will be able to decrypt anything that is encrypted with 2015 encryption. Will they? The standard ten years ago was AES-128/256. Are they able to decrypt it now?
  - veidr 12y ago
    That is probably not true -- there are a lot of things that we encrypted in 2005 that they still probably cannot decrypt today. More to the point, the NSA definitely can't decrypt everything that was encrypted a decade ago. They may be able to decrypt certain things that have somehow caught their interest. Generally, it still makes sense for all of us to encrypt by default. But OTOH a central feature of these photo services is 'easily share pics with anybody you want', so obviously they need the plaintext data to do that. I agree with junto that I would like encryption options, but I use these services anyhow because my photos just really aren't as interesting as when I was young -- mainly 100s of nearly-identical shots of babies drooling. In one sense, the NSA can have the photos of my toddler; who gives a shit. OTOH, though, it will suck when the shitty face recognition algorithms they are datamining with in 5 years generate a partial match between my son eating a rag and Jihadi John, and the feds come kick in the door to my house in the middle of the night and shoot my dog before anybody realizes what's happening... so yeah, I would just rather have it all encrypted by default.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- fit2rule 12y ago
  The NSA already have been doing this for 15 years. Any picture that goes on the wire, to any cloud or other service, is in their system..

reedlaw 12y ago

I just started using git-annex to backup my photos to Amazon Glacier. It's really powerful in that it allows you to specify the minimum number of backup copies, whether or not to "trust" a remote repo, and can automatically sync files that have fewer than the minimum number of copies. It also supports encryption using either your own GPG key or a generated one that stays in your local annex repos.

uptown 12y ago

Take a look at Koken. http://koken.me/ http://koken.me/ It's an awesome (and free) way to self-host your own photo album. Sounds like it'd solve at least part of your dream setup.