On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 20:17:48 +
Timothy Lyons wrote:
> Secure: Restic uses cryptography to guarantee confidentiality and
> integrity of your data. The location where the backup data is stored
> is assumed to be an untrusted environment (e.g. a shared space where
> others like system
That looks like a nice simple solution. my concern would be with it's
dependence on EncFs, which they admit may have significant flaws.
"EncFS is probably safe as long as the adversary only gets one copy of the
ciphertext and nothing more. EncFS is not safe if the adversary has the
opportunity
I assumed some level of competence in setting up storage (local or cloud) with
at-rest encryption - while also encrypting the backup.
Secure: Restic uses cryptography to guarantee confidentiality and integrity of
your data. The location where the backup data is stored is assumed to be an
I currently use Back In Time https://backintime.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
This is a snapshot like system with a GUI front end. I used to use
rsnapshot. Both are based on rsync. The reason I switched was because Dick
Miller swears by it and I wanted to try it. I actually preferred the
rsnapshot
On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:00:52 +
Timothy Lyons wrote:
> Sorry if I'm jumping into this late but I'd be remiss if I didn't
> throw restic into the mix. Simple, SECURE and flexible backups with
> multiple target options (local, cloud, etc). Fully configurable as
Sorry... but... the terms
Sorry if I'm jumping into this late but I'd be remiss if I didn't throw restic
into the mix.
Simple, SECURE and flexible backups with multiple target options (local, cloud,
etc). Fully configurable as to retention.
I run it as a userland systemd scheduled job on my systems, backing up locally
Eric Chadbourne writes:
>> 2. rsync
>>pro: reasonably simple, restartable, more efficient than dd
>>con: lots of small files make it slow
>>
>> 3. rsnapshot
>>pro: reasonably simple, enforces cron usage, built on rsync,
>> multiple snapshots possible
>>con: same as
