Disappointed Cat

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Disappointed Cat

  1. It was mentioned some time ago that there will be a business version. I do hope it'll only include enterprise-grade features like custom trackers and they won't make the free version painful as many companies do nowadays. I guess this is why they've kept quiet about open-sourcing and future plans. The BitTorrent team is developing great software so they deserve to be compensated for their hard work, nobody can live on goodwill, but if they start putting in ads or monetizing essential features, I'll be disappointed. I trust they'll make the right decisions.

    I don't get the secretive attitude however. It's not like we all would just pack our things and abandon the project. In fact, I'd be happy to pre-order a paid version to support faster development and more disclosure. Provided it won't be above the $10 price range. Most importantly unlimited API and open-sourcing the protocol is a must have if BTSync is to be the new major player in file synchronization and P2P utilities.

    That's my two cents.

  2. This will be a blooming business once encrypted nodes are implemented.

    If you can set up your own system then checkout Backupsy. It costs less than half of Incloudibly for the same storage and you'll also have a fully functioning VPS. Sure, it's not 'cloud' but you can just buy 2 at two locations if needed.

  3. On-site servers are not safe enough. You can be robbed, the house can burn down, a meteor could devastate your city...

    You'd better have multiple peers around the world. :)

    +1 for the linux box. It's easier to manage at this scale and it's more secure if you know what you're doing.

    And don't discard Dropbox so quick. I have 29GB free storage, it's perfect to store AES256 encrypted duplicity backups of everything important. I even wrote a convenient wrapper script to automate it.

  4. Then it's probably an app limitation, for good reason. Seriously, don't do it.

    New files in the home directories will belong to root, sensitive files could become readable for everyone and I can go on.

    Of course you could try and mitigate this with ACLs but good luck with that on a system wide scale.

  5. I misunderstood which port you're talking about. This is a big sechole indeed.

    I disabled authentication on the webui (bound to localhost) thinking I'm safe behind a secure proxy... :mellow:

    This puts it in perspective how a lot of people are complaining about the "possibility" of key collision and brute forcing when there's basically a built-in backdoor, at least in my case.

  6. Nope, only create shares for each sub-folder, one by one. If there are too many, keep your one original share but exclude that sub-folder - with .SyncIgnore. Then mount --bind the sub-folder to another location and create a new share with that. It's important that you exclude the re-shared folder from the original to avoid conflicts. I know this is cumbersome but it's only a temporary workaround.