Hi, I need your input, ideas and suggestions with regards to Tahoe-LAFS + Tails integration. The Tails trac ticket is 6227, https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/6227
I propose that the Tahoe-LAFS + Tails integration would involve these 4 components: 1. the Tahoe-LAFS debian package: This part is done. Great! 2. Tails persistent volume assistant feature additions: Right now the Tails persistent volume assistant has a user configurable list of persistence futures which correspond to sets of files that can be persisted. The user can selects which to persist or not persist. For each of these items there should be a third option: "persist to Tahoe-LAFS grid and persist to local volume". The persistent volume assistant should also prompt the user for some information on how to configure Tahoe-LAFS. Not all users will want to use a "Tahoe-LAFS onion grid", a grid only accessible via Tor Hidden Services, because of the huge performance hit and the unreliable situation that arises when storing your ciphertext blobs on anonymously hosted storage servers. LeastAuthority's S4 hosted Tahoe-LAFS service is an excellent option for Tails users. https://leastauthority.com/ However, at this time LeastAuthority does not accept bitcoin... credit card only. 3. periodic Tahoe-LAFS backup scheduler This daemon could be part of Tahoe-LAFS... there is nothing Tails specific about it. It should have some clever heuristics for scheduling the next Tahoe-LAFS backup. For instance it could use Linux's inotify to detect when a directory tree has been modified. It performs a backup every X minutes if data was modified. It would use the "tahoe backup" commandline tool creates the backup. 4. Tahoe-LAFS backup GUI applet - allows the user to execute an on-demand Tahoe backup. - Informs the user of the current Tahoe backup state; The three backup states are: a. synced b. not synced and no backup in progress c. not synced and backup in progress This auto backup scheme would not be useful for the case when a user wants to persist data that will not also be copied to the Tails persistent volume. There could be various reasons for this situation such as the data set is too large to fit on the persistent volume... For that use case a user would need to run some tahoe commands manually. Tahoe-LAFS runs just fine on Tails. David _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.