Hacker News Reader

Comment by taway2012 | Hacker News Reader

taway2012·

I'm uncomfortable about the opacity of BTsync's privacy architecture. AFAIK even the protocol isn't documented. The code obviously isn't open source.

I wouldn't use it sync anything except Truecrypt volumes. :)

View on HN

This is the same issue I have with btsync, so about a month ago I started working on an open-source clone, with similar features but an open, documented protocol. https://github.com/jewel/clearskies

best of luck. i really hope you succeed with this. it seems that right now all opensource dropbox alternatives, while great, have a shortcoming somewhere (git annex, sparkleshare, btsync...)

I'm looking forward to clearskies and will gladly switch over to it once it's ready!

though BTsync is "meant for large files" I wouldn't really advise syncing truecrypt files as it syncs the entire file not just updating lines in the file... (though that would probably be much more efficient) even still using truecrypt would still require entire file syncs the second anything changed. :/ maybe instead encrypt each file separately using AES... might be slightly better as you won't be syncing whole gigs of files if you only changed a small text file...

Or encfs, a per file encrypted filesystem.

I'm using BTSync with EncFS, but if you don't trust the BTSync binary – it's probably got access to the non-encrypted data as well unless you've jumped through a few more hoops than a "typical BTSync installation". I'd guess 99.9% of BTSync users have the binary installed with at least enough permissions to read anything the logged in user can read (which includes the cleartext-mounted stuff in your EncFS or TrueCrypt volumes).

On top of that (literally and figuratively) is Pi's ARM's TrustZone hypervisor..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com