Matt McCutchen wrote:
Eric,
Sorry for the slow response.
no problem. You're the one who's doing me a favor so take the time you need.
Yes, encryption done with --source-filter would work essentially that
way. The downside compared to something like duplicity is that the
backup host gets to see everything except the file data (i.e., file
names, sizes, times, and attributes) and, unless you take additional
precautions, can manipulate the stored data by mixing and matching
different encrypted versions of files.
yeah. I keep forgetting that. I think that backup should always be push so
that all of these confidentiality issues can be handled appropriately.
rsync/snapshot to trusted host and backing up encfs image of backup directory
may be a better solution
Well, if you have the Linux intermediary that would be necessary for
EncFS, you might prefer duplicity instead.
I have come to appreciate the value of walking a filesystem and pulling a file
out when it needs replacing. Anything that requires me to create a god awful
command line to extract the file is not fun. Remember, I've got bum hands, I
use speech recognition, and navigating with a GUI is easier than typing
especially what I can say "mouseclick" instead of something completely
unpronounceable.
---eric
--
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
