chocobai

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About chocobai

  • Rank
    New User
  1. If you upgrade, the old version of Bittorrent Sync is stored in the trash. If you did not empty the trash, just delete the current Version and drag the old one from your trash into the Applications folder. I think there is no official download for older versions.
  2. Hi, after several hours of trying, I'm able to short my bug report to this: I have 3 Computers, Two Linux (Raspbian/Debian, Ubuntu), One Mac (Mavericks). The Debian and the Mac uses Sync 2.0, the Ubuntu computer uses Sync 1.4. 1. When I add a 1.4-style read-write key to my mac, my key is one character too short (32 characters). Adding a space solves this, so I can add the folder. The key was once created with an older version of sync. It has no A,B or R in front of it. 2. Although it was a read-write key, the folder will be treated as a read-only folder. It only offers/shows me the RO key and it does sync the way a read-only folder does. It seems like it "forgets" the RW key. 3. There is no read-only-icon shown for this folder within the application. It is shown in the finder (file explorer), though. note: The folder is not already available in my 2.0 identity in a read-only way. I have no fix for 2 and 3. I'm going to log this now and send a mail to the support, but I thought this deserves a thead here.
  3. Thanks. I searched for keywords like security and I got no results... Probably I wasn't logged in yet or so and didn't notice. Okay, so, statistically it could happen. It may be very, very unlikely, but it COULD happen. While the risk may be low, is there already a plan to include (i mean directly in btsync, I know about truecrypt and similar things) something that (optional) improves this situation? It would be great if the client could send a notice to the receiver that this folder is encrypted so the receiver could automatically decrypt it using a key file or something. I'm really excited about the project and I am currently using it for sharing non-sensitive data with colleagues. Works great so far. Awesome work.
  4. Hi! If I understood the FAQ correctly, the number to a folder is generated completely random (I'm using Linux computers and a Mac). I know it's unlikely, but someone could hit the same number like I did and get my stuff, am I right? Also there is no try limit, so someone could just brute force and generate numbers or iterate until he gets some files. Are those two scenarios possible and is there a plan how to improve this? Maybe a new user has to be allowed by a central device (NAS, optional) before other devices will begin upload to the new user, using certificates or an additional password, also using a limit of false authentications etc. I'm a bit concerned because if this would work, the attacker would have unlimited time to randomly get files of other people. Wouldn't this get a problem assuming many people would use BTSync so attackers get attracted? Thanks.