goli

If you already run HTTP servers on both boxes that do HTTPS properly, you could make Sync only listen to localhost and use your HTTP servers as local proxies. That way the SSL certificates of Apache, nginx or whatever apply instead of the certificate of Sync.

Hey there. Could you elaborate a bit on that removed identity folder situation? Is it a bug of the 2.3.5 version, so waiting for a 2.3.6 or later release hopefully does not suffer from that? Or is it a general thing about handling that identity folder content which might or might not drop that folder, no matter if I jump to 2.3.5 now or wait for an additional release? Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. As mentioned by Moe, there are plenty of threads around regarding this use case. Just searching for "truecrypt" should give you tons of information. As for my personal preference: I started with Truecrypt myself long time ago but realized it wasn't really a good idea, long before there was any sign of btsync on the horizon. That's basically because of write lock issues, block sizes, growing containers and fragmentation. This can be solved by container settings of course, but I just don't feel very well with those, so I dropped container based encryption at all.Then I moved to encfs. It's file based encryption and thus solves nearly every issue container based encryption has when being synced. That's not only related to btsync but to any kind of synchronization tool in general, so diff and rsync have the very same prerequists to a container being structured to play nicely.After some performance issues and stability issues with encfs on Windows I finally reached Boxcryptor. They have two products, the current proprietary one which nearly only works with other Boxcryptor clients and the "Boxcryptor Classic" which is 100% compatible to encrypted folders created by encfs. And here I am, using a plain encfs compatible encrypted folder with Boxcryptor Classic on Windows, OS-X and Android, nicely synced by btsync. You see: When it comes to synchronization, I'm a huge fan of encfs nowadays . Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. I would like to set a name for a given share in the UI which does *not* reflect the file system folder it points to. I think about creating an arbitrary sync share, go to folder preferences in the sync UI and find there a blank field "display name" being blank by default and showing the current folder name as placeholder. Here is my use case: I run a couple of EncFS mounts where an individual fragment inside is shared by sync. Think about this unencrypted structure: * EncFS ** Private ** Music ** Stuff This results in an encrypted structure: * EncFS ** qwihvlkergoiu ** knwefiu32rlkj ** jlghrjlgrj Now I only want to sync "qwihvlkergoiu", so I created a share that only points to that directory -- but I don't want it to be named "qwihvlkergoiu" in my snyc UI but "Music". On Winsows that's pretty easy by utiliziung "mklink". Just create a link named "Music" pointing to "qwihvlkergoiu" and make sync not share "qwihvlkergoiu" but "Music". That works pretty well. Now I don't only use Windows but OS-X as well, where that kind of link isn't possible. I tried creating a regular symlink and make sync use that "Music" symlink as sync source folder, but the UI fetches the original name "qwihvlkergoiu" and displays exactly that. This goes for every situation where the actual folder name is not up to me as a user but forced by other software, like the "/etc/configuration" folder if I decide to use sync for maintaining my OpenWRT settings, or like the "/etc/apache2" folder if I decide to use sync for maintaining my linux based apache setup. Regards, Stephan.

Hey Helen. Thank you for your response. That's essentially what I wanted to hear. I guess I'll switch from 1.4 to 2.0 in a couple of days. But there's one thing left after you mentioned the license not being bound to a specific identity. Which feature exaclty makes sure to use a single license only on a single identity? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to do that. If I'm going to buy licenses, those of course will be as much as required according to the number of persons involved. The linked FAQ page says I can add the license to a sync instance by using the .btskey file. When I set up a little testing environment, let's say tow virtual windows machines in a network not connected to the outside world but only in a private LAN. Assume I'm putting a purchased license in such a testing setup. Is there any technical thing that prevents me from deleting the testing environment from my system and using that single licens on my daily driver computer afterwards? Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Could you please elaborate on how and when exactly the license check is done? Having the "LAN License" mechanism in place sounds like not having license servers to be contected. That's actually *the* main reason for me currently not to use v2: I had the impression some online license check was going on that required other servers then those being 100% controled by myselfe. So, could you please describe the actual icense validation process on this very example: * I want to use v2. * I don't want to share my data with others (currently), only three computers and two android devices all under the same sync identity since all of them are mine (laptop, gaming computer, office computer, NAS in the basement, daily mobile phone and daily tablet). * It's only about three shares. * I just don't know if I'm going to use "pro" or if "free" is enough. Since I only share personal data (music), the "free" should be enough. But just in case I get permisson from my offices IT department to use it for business stuf as well, I'll gladly upgrade to "pro": * I don't use tracker servers, relay servers and DHT, only known hosts. Does this scenario require any of the "sync" processes to contact BitTorrent servers for license verification? What happens if one day BitTorrent decides to go out of business. In case I go with the "free" version, will that still keep working or does ist stop because of not being able to contact BitTorrent license servers? The fact of having the "LAN License" mechanism in place makes me hope that no Licenserver is required to keep "free" mode working. That, in fact, could be *the* major point for my corporation to consider this product for sharing internal data. [edit] The very answer I hope for is much shorter than the question. So you might just say yes/no to those assertions: A license server is only used to retrieve a license file for a given identity. If no license file is available for a given identity (no matter if that is because of no license server is available or if the license server has no file to provide for me), the client just uses the "free" mode. The entire license check is done on client side by validating the license file (cryptographic signature) and making sure the license file matches the current identity. No server connection asking "is the current license file still valid" is established. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. I wouldn't expect that to work any time soon. Well, I wouldn't expect it to work at all. There is one thing with recordings on smart TVs: They don't want them to be shared. I know a couple of devices from Sony, Phillips, Samsung and LG. All of them are perfectly fine with playing videos from nearly arbitrary USB devices. But all of them refuse to store live TV record files on them until the USB device isn't encrypted by the actual TV. This means: If you record live TV on that USB device and move it to a regular PC, that PC wouldn't be able to read those recordings. Having asked all of those manufacturer support channels to explain why that's the case, most of them just don't respond. Only LG responded by saing most pay tv providers wouldn't cooperate with them if they this was possible. Whatever this means. Might be technical stuff, might be only marketing. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Using telnet, what about "netstat | grep btsync" or "pgrep"? Or if your NAS provides the web ui of sync, you could make your monitorig tool expect the web ui to respond properly by simply fetching the http result. Regards, Stephan.

Awesome, 0104006e works. Any hints on how you got to this value? I don't see any correlation to any btsync app version number.

Hey there. The registry key used to work properly for a couple of days now. I just upgraded to the lastest version, which is 1.4.110. That one either already comes with this key or didn't overwrite it. Either way, the registry key is in place just like it was during the last week but 1.4.110 just keeps prompting the UAC window. Any hints? Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Are you up to that error and close to releasing something or do you need more logs for investigation? I think i have the very same issue here. My music lib is ~5000 tracks and ~500 folders that sum up to 28GB of size. 295 of those files (2.85GB) don't get synced corretly. There are files on my mobile phone, but their revision isn't the latest one. "Touching" the files on one of my computers caused my other Linux and Windows nodes to realign but my mobile phone still shows the version from a couple of weeks ago. File system on my mobile phone is perfectly writable. I still have 30GB of space left and creating folders and files works just nice. Even creating new files on my android phone and having them synced to my computers works nicely. My Android is a Sony Xperia Z3 Compact running plain sony Android 4.4.4, no root. Target device is my external MicroSD card. So, should I send in some more logs on this or do you just know what's wrong and only need some time for fixing? Regards, Stephan.

Thank you, that's an answer. If the drawback is the very same for all iOS devices I might get my hands on some devices that don't work with my car but can show me how sync performs. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Sry if this question has been answered somewhere else but the search function doesn't allow me to search "iOS" and searching for "iPhone 4" doesn't work well. I want to know if btsync (both vresions, 1.4.x as well as 2.x) work with iPhone 4s. As to some shops, they come with iOS 5, 6 or 7. I don't have any apple devices yet, and I never wanted one. So I cannot check myself, unfortunately. My car (BMW from 2007) doesn't support USB devices but only comes with a 30 pin apple dock connector. Searching the net for compatible apple devices gives various results. Some say 30-pin to lightning adaptors work well, others say they don't and I must stick to apple devices that come with 30 pin connectors natively. To make a long story short: I might be forced to buy an iPhone 4s since that's the only device having 30 pin apple connector and at least 64GB memory (except the iPhone classic, but 300€ for an iPhone 4s would be better then 600€ for an iPod classic). But because the iPhone 4s is a pretty old device and I don't know anybody nearby still owning such a thing, I must ask here befor buying. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. I doubt those features have changed from 1.4 to 2 significantly. The "search on LAN" is nice because it broadcasts. So every host being reachable through broadcasts is covered. There are two drawbacks. The first one is: That only covers the current LAN segment. I could e.g. create one IP segment per team and have a couple of teams. They are free to communicate whatever they want, so firewall rules are *not* what I want to set up. The second one is: Whenever I sign in to a public WiFi like Starbucks or any hotel, I need to disable the "search on LAN" thing since there is a chance the firwall just blacklists me because of creating torrent like traffic. The "know hosts" list is completely different. Here I put single host names in that are *not* reachable through broadcasts. I run a couple of VPS in different data centers. I don't want them to be on DHL tables since that's just not necessary. I know their static IPs and they never change. I really doubt one can combine those features. Broadcasts are meant to stop on network segment borders, and this is for a reason. Adding "foreign LAN segments" to the broadcast thingy would mean dropping the broadcast feature and use a "brute force IP range" instead. That's clearly not what I want. Instead, you could go for something like a "broadcast relay". That's something your router (or any other host having different legs in different network segments) could do. If you look for regular UPNP (which is used for DLNA, for example), you use tools like "igmpproxy" which does that job. I haven't digged into the sync broadcast. There are chances protocol changes to the broadcast mechanism can make it IGMP compliant so igmpproxy works with no changes. Might this be worth a feature request? Adjusting the broadcast thingy to default IGMP? Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. As I stated somewhere else (don't know, could be some pages back in this thread): That's quite easy. * Create an asymmetric encryption key pair * Put the public part in the binaries and ship it to the customer * Sign the string "licensed until 12/30/2015" with the private part * Hand both, that string as well as the calculated signature in one file to the user and call it "license file" => done. Now every user has to issue a license file every couple of months and no client needs to contact any licensing server since the validation can be done by the client itself. This procedure 100% fits the "only one license per user, as much client computers as you want" scenario. But I really hope bittorrent rethinks the whole situation. 40 bugs a year is quite a number if no storage is provided. The marketing page is completely wrong by comparing storage capacities. The number is not "unlimited" as stated but more like "zero, you need to probide that yourself". Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Actually, if you know how to do backup better than everyone else, maybe you should make a business out of it and sell your own product? But first things first. Did you notice the archiving feature? The checkbox is called "Store deleted files in folder archive" on your desktop device. Keep in mind that this is *not* a local backup thingy for your desktop computer. It just creates a copy of your lokal files whenever a remote peer sends you a modified version. The goal is to prevent remote peers to cause data loss on your local data. Default is keeping those archive files for 30 days. There is a config parameter to adjust that time but I don't know if you can set it to "forever". Look for "sync_trash_ttl". Unfortunately that's not to be configured per individual share, so when you make your local computer use that setting it goes for every share with the same value. Currently there is no user interface for managing archived data. Might be worth a feature request to create something user friendly. Currently you have to browse the archive folder manually and fetch your prefered file version. I'm not completely sure if there alreay is a feature request for that, but could be nice to "right click on any file in sync folder, click on 'show archive' and receive a list of versions and corresponding archive dates". In addition, maybe bittorrent could think about storing deltas for archive. Currently the archive feature costs lot of space if used heavily. I guess that's something to go in the payed pro branch of sync version 2: Advanced archive handling. I still troubled which features would be woth paying, but that sounds like a real candidate. I just tried the sync default camera backup. My current phone is still new, so there are only 50 pictures on it currently. All synced fine. Then I deleted 10 of them because they were only to clarify camera anyway. They now are gone from my android but still on my computer. So the "backup" feature of the android sync version does what you want at east if it comes to delete files. Modifying files should make use of the .sync/Archive folder, too. Maybe you could go for some cascaded solution to achieve your backup goal. Use sync to synchronize your mobile phone with your desktop computer as a first step, then use an ordinary backup tool for backing up your desktop computer as a second step. That doesn't give you "any time granularity" for modification steps. But that's not too important I think because ordinary backups of your desktop computer lacks that as well. So only having daily snapshots or something is the usual way to go. Actually that's exactly what I do without even thinking about it. The reason is the simple fact of backuing up my computer regularely to a NAS device. Regards, Stephan.

Don't get me wrong budy. But if you really do not want to sync but backup, don't you thing a tool called "sync" might not exactly be what you are looking for? As to the first point you called "1" but raised as a second topic: Target directory. I have absolutely no clue what's going on with your device. I disabled "Simple mode" in "Settings" on my android device and here the selected folder is used just as I expected it to be. What about those mobile folders that are distinctively mentioned as "backup"? Are they just misspelled and "sync" as well? Then I would suggest you to go to the trouble shooting forum and call it ab bug.

Hey there. That's one of the things being announced for sync version 2 to be available as part of the payed version only. As long as there is no version 2 available: Nope, it's not possible at the moment. You need to wait for version 2 being released and then check for a pro license. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Have you digged in to that new Lillipop API features? First phones have just been provided with 5.0 and more are announced to come in the next couple of weeks. Would be awesome if someone would tell me "yes, this just made it into the very first 2.0 version we release" or something. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. Depending on the actual terms and conditions it's not necessary to have a central authentication service to keep track of valid or invalid subscriptions. If I would release software by any kind of time limited license, I would just issue license files. Every license file just contains the current date and is cryptographically signed by me. Whenever someone installs my software, he just drops the license into the application. The application binary contains my public key part. This way every application process can individually decide if the entered license file is valid, invalid or expired. I really dislike any software that has to be payed per time period. It always gives me the impression of being forced to pay forever unless I want to lose a lot of work when either I dicontinue the primary tool or the software service provider does. Although sync isn't such a thing since all my data stays right where it is even if I uninstall sync, the feeling is pretty much the same. Having that said, if I was you I wouldn't issue "pay per usage period" license. I would issue licenses that allow to install application binaries being released within one year after the moment the license is issued. This means if I buy a one year license today, that one would grant me access to every version released before nov 21th 2015. I still could install that 2015/11/21 version in 2016 if I wanted. This usually is selled as "buy the current version and receive one year upgrades". It's nearly the same thing as "licensed per year" since most of regular users clearly renew their upgrade privileges once per year. But it gives customers the feeling of paying for improvements. The "pay per year" thing instead gives curstomers the impression of paying just to maintain the current state. As soon as someone gets used to a current workflow, it's usually not really an option to step back to the free version but rather compared to completely re-thinking the whole thing. What if I rely on fine grained privilege control. I don't necessarily talk about active directory integration, can be as simple as a shared holiday photo directory configured as "drop your photos in but don't delete mine" (don't know if this will work). As soon as canceling the subscription means losing access control, stepping back requires me to cancel that share completely as wel. At the end of the day it's totally up to you how pricing works. But I would really like to not having to decide wether to renew a subscription or to stop using the current feature set. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. I prefer EncFS all over the place. It's a per-file encryption, so no need to synchronize huge containers, no need to provision huge containers just in case the data might grow and a lot easier sync since file system locks are done on a per-file level as well, where encrypted containers like TrueCrypt used to be one hold one single lock on the container until it is closed. And ontop of that you can even use the archive feature (limited by the fact that with enabled file name encryption archived files aren't that easy to match, but, well, ...) and use its benefits. So going for EncFS makes live easier in so many areas. On my Windows computer I run "BoxCryptor Classic" which basically implements a strong subset of EncFS. I tried the Windows port for EncFS (encfs4win) and used that for nearly two years, but that seemed to have stopped a couple of years ago in a pretty unstable phase. So I moved to the payed version of BoxCryptor in ordre to have encrypted fine names and I am fine since then. But make sure to use the "BoxCryptor Classic" one. The new version is *not* compatible to EncFS and thereby requires the according BoxCryptor programm on every remote host which wants to access the encrypted data. And the new version is a pay-per-year thing where the classic version is a one-time-pay. On my android phone I use "Cryptonite". That just works because the "BoxCryptor Classic" data is *just EncFS* and Cryptonite is, too. On a rootet android phone, "Cryptonite" can mount (!!) the encrypted share to an arbitrary folder where every other android program can access its data natively. On non-rootet android phones you have to use the file browser integrated in Cryptonite, pick a single file and open it with the according android program. So having root is much more convenient since it's simply 100% transparent. My setup looks like this: Encrypted Folder: .encfs6.xml (file containing decryption information, required for decryption but not sufficient, you still need your password) abcdefg (encrypted version of "Musyc"), so it contains the encrypted data of my music hijkl (encrypted version of "Private"), so it contains the encrypted data of my private files mnopq (encrypted version of "Business"), so it contains some encrypted work data I have "abcdefg" as one btsync share. It's distributed to my personal computer, my rooted android phone. I have "hijkl" as another btsync share, distributed to my all of my personal computers, my android phone and my work computer. I have "mnopq" as third btsync share, distributed to my android phone and my work computer. The .encfs6.xml file is not part of any share, so one essential part to decrypt data is *not* transfered to any remote host by any sync tool. So when encfs runs on my personal computer, it has one decrypted folder containing Music and Private. When encrs runs on my android phone, it has one decrypted folder containing private stuff, business stuff and music. When encrs runs on my business computer it has one decrypted folder contianng Private and Business. Advantages of this: only one password for all of thos sharesdifferent shares per task, distributed on different host where they are demand A couple of weeks ago I switched from Samsung Galay S2 with Cyanogenmod and root to a Sony Xperia Z3 Comapct without root. So I lost the transparent decryption feature and was forced to move my music out of the encrypted share in order to make it appear in my androids music player app. But I can live with that. My personal stuff like ssh keys or Keepass database file are still inside of the encrypted folder. Would be pretty awesom if Android provided API access to something like FUSE. But unfortunately I never heared of such a thing. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. I just doubel checked with an image: It's not working, too. There is a file at /storage/sdcard1/Android/data/.nomedia Btsync is forced to write to /storage/sdcard1/Android/data/com.bittorrent.sync/ As soon as I move the shared folder directly to /storage/sdcard1 the gallery starts noticing my media, but then btsync is no longer able to sync. So I expect the android media scanner to be notified about changes properly but most likely the media scanner refuses to take btsyncs media files into account due to that .nomedia file. Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. My issue is basicaly related to those: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/26567-btsync-can-no-longer-sync-to-ext-sd-card-on-note-3-after-update-android-442/ http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/28275-android-442-doesnt-have-permission-to-write-to-this-folder/ But I might have a slightly different branch of that issue, though. I'm perfectly fine with having my sync data in /sdcard1/Android/data/com.bittorrent.sync. I don't care about not being able to modify those data from other applications. So being forced to have my sync data stored in here and having other apps not being allowed to write those data isn't an issue to me. But unfortunately the /sdcard1/Anroid/data folder contains a ".nomedia" file, which makes every music synchronized through btsync not appear in my music lib. And that's the real issue for me. I tried to sync ~20GB of music which worked quite well. This 20GB is now in there, and browsing through my file system and selecting individual MP3 files works. So the data is properly written. But doe to that ".nomedia" file inside of the /sdcard1/Android/data folder, the andoid media scanner skips that directory completely. According to anroid documentation that's just as expected because those app specific folders are not meant to contain "shared media files". What a pitty! I did find the "synchronize gallery automatically" checkbox in advaned settings, and I expected it to have the folder scanned by btsync instead of the media scanner and have each file added manually by the btsync app to the lib instead of relying on the media scanner. But that doesn't work. I don't know if it's btsync which doesn't trigger that properly or whatever. The only thing I know: If my data is stored inside of the app specific folder, my music lib just keeps being empty. I'm on a Sony Xperia Z3 Compact running Android 4.4.4 currently. I know there is official root by Sony for this device which would help me to work around that issue. But since getting root form Sony will delete DRM keys and some proprietary libs from my device my camera quality will decrease, I'm really not up to rooting my device any time soon. There are guys having some workarounds in place for that issue, afaik. They're basically saying: Extend the media scanner class and make it believe there is no .nomedia file when scanning your app folder. https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=68056 Could this be an acceptable sollution? In addition to this: Is there a way to have an android service run on android startup and make the according additions to the internal media libs despite having the actual btsync app not configured as "run on startup"? Regards, Stephan.

Hey there. As statet two weeks ago: When using several windows and linux hosts, preserving time stampts just works there. Now I added an android device (Samsung Galaxy S2 with latest Cyanogenmod 10.1 nightly). Local storage on the android device is the external SD card with FAT32. Seems this android configuration doesn't work. Synchronized files get the current time of syncronization when being written instead of the time stamp of the source file. So that's not a feature request but a bug, I guess. Regards, Stephan.

I like that idea. But I wouldn't bind it to local computers. Instead I would call it like this: If two remote nodes provide the same data and the reached bandwidth differs by more than 75%, just skip the slower one. Make the actual percentage configurable. The idea is: If the bandwidth differs by a certain percentage, the slower node has no significant impact in the overall performance. So there is no need to fill up the like, no matter if its the own line to the internet or the remote nodes line. Regards, Stephan.