• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Spacemarine

  • Rank
  1. I guess by PC you mean Windows? Or are you running Linux on hardware other than PC and want the encryption to work there also? The two software solutions you refer to work completely different. AEScrypt encrypts every single file and every single file has to be selected by hand (at least that is the impression I got after reading the website for a minute) Definitely not a "hands-off" solution. Veracrypt works just like truecrypt, which I have a lot of experience with. It encrypts a whole filesystem and writes it into a single file or encrypts a whole partition and writes it into a partition. This is definitely a hands-off solution, but will probably not go well BTsync. At least it is very troublesome with Dropbox, because Dropbox only syncs the encrypted file after is has been closed (unmounted, removed from operation) which is only the case when the user is finished working. So if two people work at the same time on the same set of encrypted files, there will be problems. I think the problem will be the same with BTsync. So I see only two options here: 1. Use a software, that works well with Dropbox, then it should work well with BTsync. We have used Boxcryptor or EncFS, However EncFS is a pain to set up under Windows, Boxcryptor doesn't have Linux support at the moment. 2. Use just BTsync and make one of the computers an encrypted-read only node, this should also achieve your goals. Please let me know if you find any alternative, I'm also interested in that.
  2. Exactly. That's what I was saying. If you can send the encrypted files via email, you can sync them with BTsync without decrypting them. Which program do you intend to use to encrypt?
  3. Your answer is correct, but that was not what he was asking about. He asked about files that are already encrypted on his computer, like with truecrypt or other programs. At least that is the most likely interpretation of his not very specific question.
  4. I wanted to sync my windows machine with my android device, but I couldn't because btsync thought that the clocks didn't match. However, I was pretty sure both clocks were ok, since both were synced to the internet. I only got the error message, that the clocks are not in sync, so I had to dig through the setting in both windows and android. My suggestion: Show the time difference between each client and the tracker, in that case I would have immediately seen that android is +- a few seconds and windows is +- one hour, so I would have known that it is a timezone error within windows.
  5. I did some test on exactly this scenario (took two computers, renamed large files, watched the network traffic) and Btsync noticed all the folder/file renaming/moving etc. No data was sent twice. Even if you copy a file and put it into two folders, it will be copied at your partners computer and not retransmitted again.
  6. That depends on if you sync the encrypted or unencrypted data. Btsync is doing nothing else than sending your files, just like when you would send them via email.
  7. I already checked that, I was able to sync between these computers perfectly. Then I deleted all the shares and created new ones. No nothing works anymore. Also restarted both computers multiple times and deleted and added the shares again.
  8. Thanks, that makes it clear! Actually, I like it the way it works at the moment, I was just puzzled about this.
  9. I have the same problem. I shared a RW-folder from Mac to Ubuntu via email and now it is stuck on pending approval. Both computers run 1.4.83
  10. In the documentation it is mentioned that the difference between the backup function on mobile devices and a read-only key is the fact that the backup function does not remove files on the computer if they are removed on the mobile device. However, there seems to be another difference: If a file gets removed on the computer, it will not be retransmitted immediately like it does with a read-only key. Is this an an undocumented feature or bug? Or is something wrong with my understanding?
  11. Sounds interesting, but did you manage to find out why these files weren't synced in the first place? Sounds like a bug on BTsync to me.
  12. Is there any overview about the performance of BTsync on NAS? On which one do we get which performance? Is the AES-encryption the bottleneck? If so, will using a CPU with AES-NI instruction speed up sync significantly? I want to sync large amounts of data over a 1 Gbit line and I want to fully saturate that link if possible. From what I read here in various posts, cheap NAS seem to be miles away from that performance.
  13. I don't think this will help with greycobalts problem. He wants to sync files only ONCE. And then not sync the same file again. I think this is not possible at the moment with BTsync.