×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source Alternative To Dropbox?

CmdrTaco posted more than 2 years ago | from the post-it-notes-on-telephone-polls dept.

Cloud 482

garry_g writes "While 'the cloud' may be one of the major buzzwords of the Internet industry, anybody concerned with security and privacy will most likely not touch it with a 10-foot pole. While I am guilty of using Dropbox for occasional data storage or quick picture snaps with my Android phone, I do watch out not to store anything important on there (or incriminating), no matter what the "privacy policy" may be. I was wondering: what useful alternative is there to Dropbox on the FOSS market, which will allow access by both windows/linux boxes, but also mobile devices (specifically Android). I know there are front-end add ons for Windows (and Linux tools of course) e.g. for SVN, but most likely no implementations for mobile use as far as I can tell... And, of course, the backend should run on a Linux box ;)"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

482 comments

Sparkleshare (5, Informative)

Moderator (189749) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464670)

Sparkleshare [sparkleshare.org] is still under development, and it seems to have the most traction of any user-friendly project. When released, it will be the open-source Dropbox replacement.

I agree though, it's very hard to get rid of the convenience of Dropbox. Not just for saving files, but for syncing your configuration across machines (save your .dotFiles in ~/Dropbox and then symlink to ~/). But when they refuse to support the BSD's (2 out of the 4 machines I regularly work on), and their Linux implementation starting requiring disabling SELinux [dropbox.com], they pretty much did it to themselves. Not to mention the whole thing where the Dropbox CTO admitted they could look at your files [bnet.com] if they wanted.

Re:Sparkleshare (1)

jdray (645332) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465222)

In Korea, only old people use Dropbox.

[Sorry, I haven't been around in a while...]

Re:Sparkleshare (1)

Baseclass (785652) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465294)

It's been awhile indeed, that meme lasted about a week like 2 years ago.

Re:Sparkleshare (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465392)

Wow, you are way off. The "In Korea, Only Old People" meme is almost eight years old. It came from a story about how only old people used email in Korea around 2003 or 2004.

Some are WIP (1)

Anssi55 (729722) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464694)

There are Syncany [syncany.org] and SparkleShare [sparkleshare.org], but neither seems to satisfy your requirements yet as they are still quite new projects and work-in-progress (without e.g. android clients afaics).

Re:Some are WIP (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465424)

I have not used it heavily myself but If you are talking about your own server for this then what about rsync?
there is an android app for it (also not one I have tested) http://www.appbrain.com/app/rsync-backup-for-android/eu.kowalczuk.rsync4android
as well as multiple Linux and windows clients.

TrueCrypt (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464702)

Dropbox is perfectly secure if you use TrueCrypt.

Re:TrueCrypt (1)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464740)

Dropbox is perfectly secure if you use TrueCrypt.

Are there Android apps to access first the DropBox account and then decrypt the TrueCrypt inside of it? If not, this option doesn't fully answer the asked question.

Re:TrueCrypt (2)

1karmik1 (963790) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464784)

This. Just create a truecrypt image on Dropbox and the privacy issues are solved. If there are other problems, like unsupported clients and whatnot like someone mentioned in a comment, then it might be wise to look elsewhere.

Re:TrueCrypt (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464982)

Does Dropbox only sync parts of a file that have changed? If so this will work, otherwise this will be horrible, especially with a slow upload speed. I might have to try this though.

Re:TrueCrypt (1)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465322)

They only sync parts that have changed, with a 4 MB granularity. (That is, files are logically divided into 4 MB chunks, and only chunks that change are synced.)

Re:TrueCrypt (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464988)

Right, but isn't the whole volume going to have to be synced every time you make a change?

Or are you talking about creating an image for each file?

Re:TrueCrypt (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465024)

I am concerned about security on a cloud service...
Except for asking them to explain their security to you. I will download a tool without doing any security audit on it. Put it on my PC right under my desk and open a port to the outside world on my firewall. That way I feel a lot safer.

On the whole you are better off with cloud services. The key disadvantage is if it goes down, a lot of people go down too.

Now Cloud isn't perfect for everyone once you reach a critical size it is probably cheaper and for you to move it in house. And when you go with a cloud service and you are going to invest a lot of money... Be sure you come up with a good Contract with them. Don't let them abuse you, you work with legal to get the correct contract, if they refuse you go to the next guy.

Re:TrueCrypt (0)

BLToday (1777712) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465174)

I've been having problems with Dropbox using only the original uploaded TrueCrypt files and not any updates that I've made to it.

Rent a box at rackspace (1)

mallyn (136041) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464720)

Rent a system at rackspace or a similar place; run linux on it?

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464808)

Run linux... and what else?
I've got a Linux box that's exposed to the Internet, but I'm not sure how to get the same kind of easy drop-box like functionality out of it.. I mean ,I could always SFTP into it, but that's more clicks and the monthly "upgrade available" pop-ups from Filezilla are darned annoying..

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (1)

kryliss (72493) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465154)

- Edit
- Settings
- Update Check
- Uncheck Enable automatic update check

Easy as pi.

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465036)

Rent a system at rackspace or a similar place; run linux on it?

How do you keep the people that have physical access to your machine from messing with your files?

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (2)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465094)

Rent a system at rackspace or a similar place; run linux on it?

How do you keep the people that have physical access to your machine from messing with your files?

A video camera and an attached shotgun.

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465190)

How do you keep the people that have physical access to your machine from messing with your files?

Short of heavy-duty crypto ... I think most security falls apart when someone can have physical access to the machine.

And, even then, someone with the resources might be able to get through it if they were determined enough.

You want security, keep your files on your own machine, not in the cloud or on someone else's server.

Re:Rent a box at rackspace (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465216)

Short of heavy-duty crypto ...

Short of it? That wasn't even covered in the original post. That was the point.

Ubuntu One (1)

Sylak (1611137) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464732)

Not to state the obvious but... is Ubuntu One what you mean?

Re:Ubuntu One (1)

mdragan (1166333) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464940)

He said he doesn't trust the cloud, so probably doesn't matter if it's owned by Canonical or someone else. He wants to own the server, he probably wants to keep it in his bedroom.

Re:Ubuntu One (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465070)

He said he doesn't trust the cloud, so probably doesn't matter if it's owned by Canonical or someone else. He wants to own the server, he probably wants to keep it in his bedroom.

Ubuntu One is based on CouchDB, so he could host that piece himself; I wonder if any of the Ubuntu One clients support changing the target URL (may have to re-compile).

Re:Ubuntu One (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465090)

The backend for Ubuntu One is proprietary, unfortunately.

Re:Ubuntu One (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465332)

Ubuntu One is very useful, but I'm not sure if it will also work with Windows (Cygwin maybe? Never tried it). As mdragan says though, he wants it running on his own server I think, so it's not what he's after.

To be honest I'd just use an ftp folder and cron jobs for the synchronisation if the data's not particularly sensitive.

What about Usenet? (2)

landofcleve (1959610) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464746)

It has been a cloud type service that has been around for how long? Granted it's not private, but all you have to do is encrypt your files. And as for privacy, considering the things that people continuously post there, and don't get caught, speaks to the possibilities. Yeah I suppose, data retention has only in the last few years gotten good enough to make a difference. But there have got to be some things we could learn about making the cloud work better from it.

ftp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464756)

you could run an ftp server on linux. there are ftp apps for iphone and android. With a few lines of php you could even list out all the files that have been uploaded and allow them to be downloaded with a web interface.

Re:ftp (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465128)

Great, all that's left is to update your server periodically, secure your ftp, and find some sort of auto-syncing functionality.

SSH? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464758)

I am wondering - I've been using my home server with ssh for this for ages ....

I know it's not super easy, but it takes a few seconds to setup in ubuntu and the like ....

Google (0)

thebra (707939) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464780)

I googl'd "open source alternatives to dropbox" and got back lots of results.

Re:Google (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464942)

And which one are any good?

That's what bothers me about the "let me google that for you" crowd. Google is a search engine. It is no expert system, and it certainly makes no recommendation based on certain qualities of a product.

Re:Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465026)

Well, no.

Re:Google (1)

stating_the_obvious (1340413) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464966)

It's true there are lots of results -- but having researched this myself for the last few weeks, I'm pretty sure there is nothing fully baked. Dropbox is quite good at what it does (security aside), and replicating it across multiple OS platforms and mobile devices is quite hard.

What I'd love to see (although not FOSS) is simply the ability to run dropbox on a private sever. sadly, dropbox shows no interest in this solution.

Hosted Alternatives (5, Informative)

slifox (605302) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464782)

There are some decent-looking hosted alternatives to dropbox which do client-side encryption. I've looked into this a bit, but I haven't tried any of these yet, so YMMV...

One particularly interesting one is TarSnap. The best part is the client is OSS, so you can verify that encryption is done properly (strong & client-side). You could even reverse the protocol and design your own server software, if you want.
http://www.tarsnap.com/ [tarsnap.com]

Another interesting one is SpiderOak. However their client is not OSS, so you have to trust that they're doing the encryption properly
https://spideroak.com/ [spideroak.com]

Here are some other potential hosts, but I'm not sure exactly how proper the encryption is:
http://www.boxcryptor.com/ [boxcryptor.com]
http://syncplicity.com/products/ [syncplicity.com]

Re:Hosted Alternatives (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465210)

I've always thought about this -- how about a distributed storage network? Anyone using this needs to have a dedicated line and allocate at least 1 GB of their personal storage, and in return, they get 0.5 GB of distributed storage. The idea is similar to a P2P network, only, the data is distributed and redundant across every peer on the network (hence the reason you only get half of what you put in). As long as the encryption is quite secure, and there's a central server tracking the users, it should be fairly straightforward to build. Participants could even be ranked in terms of reliability, and less reliable users can be kicked off the grid (i.e. if you're trying to freeload on the system by not staying connected).

I have used JungleDisk for years (1)

altamira (639298) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464804)

For this very reason. I use RackSpace and S3 for storage, the encryption occurs locally, so the cloud storage provider cannot get your data. They have free source code so you can validate how it works too. Has never failed on me and saved my data several times with backup and sync. Happy customer

The cloud is secure - if treated correctly (4, Insightful)

Mephistophocles (930357) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464812)

Dropbox is secure - just use PGP to encrypt everything you put up there, and decrypt it upon arrival at your host machine. I suppose that would require a jail-broken Android, but that's not all bad... I don't generally accept arguments that the cloud isn't secure. It is, if used correctly (see above). The cloud is like a public restroom - you treat it differently than the one in your house by being much more conscious about cleanliness and such (in the cloud, more conscious about security), but it's perfectly acceptable to use both.

Re:The cloud is secure - if treated correctly (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465048)

The cloud is like a public restroom

In that they're both full of other people's shit.

What does SVN have to do with it? (2)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464818)

Why is SVN being compared to DropBox? There's no mobile app for SVN access because, typically, people don't do development on their phones...

Re:What does SVN have to do with it? (1)

mdragan (1166333) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465002)

SVN is not a development application, it is a version control application where you can store your data versioned. So if you want to keep text data on a central repository, SVN is good for that. Problem with it is that it's not good with binary data, so, not a solution for keeping different versions of your pictures, heh.

Re:What does SVN have to do with it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465402)

SVN can be used for versioning backups. I was using it for a while for just this purpose. Check out http://fsvs.tigris.org/. There are svn clients for Androids (subdroid and android-client are two that come to mind), google is your friend.

Re:What does SVN have to do with it? (1)

TheAmazingRyRy (2009048) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465016)

Why is SVN being compared to DropBox? There's no mobile app for SVN access because, typically, people don't do development on their phones...

SVN is not just used for development. It is a versioning system. If you want to store some files and keep track of all changes to those files, SVN would be what you want. Because it keeps track of the changes to files, it's not quite what you'd want in this situation, but it would be one method to store things in "the cloud".

Android phones pictures? (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464840)

Why would he need dropbox for pictures snapped from his android phone?
If he has Android, he has google.
If he has google he has Picasa.
If he has picasa his android will sync with it at will.

Re:Android phones pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465146)

I've got an Android phone but I'm not storing anything on Google servers. Unfortunately I need a Google account to use some essential functionality of the OS (the market). I'd be happy to use it anonymously.

The only file I store on DropBox is an encrypted backup of some important files. Maybe I'm a little privacy nut but that's the way it is :) Luckily I see today that I'm not alone.

Re:Android phones pictures? (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465404)

True, the paranoid might want to store their upskirts on dropbox or a secure private storage somewhere other than on the phone (which could be seized by police). But this hardly makes sharing easy.

The request was for something more secure than Dropbox, or at lease open source. I have no problem with that. There' are documents I won't put on Google Docs, even tho I use Google heavily.

It just seemed to me that photo snaps were the least of my concern, and I would just keep them on the phone unless I wanted the share them, and if I wanted to share them dropbox or any other private implementation of that sort would be counter productive.

Thats where I was going with my post. Just the photo sharing angle. And maybe I imagined the sharing part.

Not all Android devices have Market and Picasa (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465180)

If he has Android, he has google.

Not necessarily. Android-powered devices not using the Open Handset Alliance version of Android don't get the non-free Google apps.

rsync.net FTW. (4, Informative)

enselsharon (968932) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464842)

I've had personal and business accounts at rsync.net going back over 5 years.

It's simple, it's straightforward, and it works out of the box with everything I use.

Oh, and there's this:

http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/canary.txt [rsync.net]

It's not the cheapest offering, but my employers' account @ 2TB is around 28 cents/GB, per month.

dvcs-autosync (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464864)

I asked the same question a while ago and found nothing better than my existing messing rsync hack. However since then I've been pointer towards http://mayrhofer.eu.org/dvcs-autosync although I've yet to try it myself.

ownCloud or Wuala (5, Informative)

DVega (211997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464890)

On the open-source front, the only option I know is ownCloud [owncloud.org]. It provides the software to build your 'Cloud' storage, but you must provide your own hardware.

On the other side, you can try Wuala [wuala.com]. It is not Open Source, but it encrypts all your files before uploading them. There are clients for almost every platform.

Re:ownCloud or Wuala (1)

imamac (1083405) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465102)

I use owncloud. It it certainly not as robust as DropBox, but it works for my needs. It also has a plugin system for functionality expansion.

Re:ownCloud or Wuala (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465204)

I do use Wuala and I like it very much.

Now while the data is supposed to be encrypted on my computer before leaving it, I wonder how they do allow me to access my files using the web (you can go to http://www.wuala.com/ and browse your files, even give other people access to it). When I download a file from the web links, the speed is much greater than my local internet access and it works even if my home computer is shutdown.

I guess the real situation is one of those (I would bet on the 1st one):

  1. the encryption key is shared with wuala (but not with the other peers)
  2. the data ins't really encrypted with a different key for everybody...

So it's is secure from other peers, but not from wuala. Still, it's a pretty good service (you can trade local disk storage for 'cloud' disk storage or you can buy 'cloud' storage...)

OwnCloud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464892)

KDE OwnCloud (Cross platform, WebDav and native frontend for everything (windows explorer included) and a HTML frontend) it use Git as backend.

ifolder (3, Informative)

bsmokeman (303354) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464894)

Novell open-sourced ifolder. there are clients for linux, windows, mac, and even iphone. Someone just needs to write a client for android.
We are implementing it on a large scale, with Active Directory integration, and 270 mobile laptop users. I understand novell is moving to neutron (their new file/folder sync technology). It should solve some of the issues we had, such as integrating with a windows server, however it will not be open-source. We just used the ifolder client, and a proxy user for everyone's folder to bypass that issue. We looked extensively for a solution, and settled on ifolder, however mobile phones weren't part of the requirement.

Re:ifolder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465318)

iFolder is Open Source

Subversion? (1)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464900)

It might not be as convenient and be designed for an entirely different purpose, but it works for me.

ssh + rsync = win! (4, Informative)

WWE-TicK (593858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464904)

I put a Linux box with an SSH server and rsync on my FIOS line. Then I use rsync for Android to sync file shares between the Linux box and my Android tablet. This has been working fine for me. It might even be more secure than Dropbox.

Even FTP is more secure (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464908)

Pretty sad isn't it?
SFTP is far better than both and is open.

Re:Even FTP is more secure (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465014)

That's just the communications protocol and is only part of the service. There are other crucial parts, such as figuring out what to sync, and which direction to sync it, and of course how to store the files on the server securely.

Re:Even FTP is more secure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465076)

Pretty sad isn't it?
SFTP is far better than both and is open.

But as the OP mentioned, clicking a pop up once a month is far too exhausting. We must, instead, invest hours of research, implementation and testing so we don't waste minutes of our time over the long haul.

Re:Even FTP is more secure (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465168)

SFTP is far better than both and is open.

...and insufficient in terms of functionality. Oops.

Re:Even FTP is more secure (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465284)

How so?
What is wrong with the current SFTP clients in comparison to the combination of a web browser and dropbox or similar?

Re:Even FTP is more secure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465366)

I didn't know that SFTP provided an off-site data storage facility?

Ifolder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464926)

Ifolder is open source. The client is rather slow but it works...

rsync (3, Interesting)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 2 years ago | (#36464934)

I believe that rsync is able to cover most of dropbox's features, if not all. By using rsync you aren't bound to any service provider or even internet access. You may not have the flashy web interface and flashy android/desktop client but it is somewhat trivial to implement a front-end to rsync that abstracts all implementation details. If you wish to have some sort of history log then you can always set your clients to implement some form of incremental backup of your repository.

Re:rsync (1)

profplump (309017) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465228)

And unison [upenn.edu] extends the rsync model to do bi-directional syncing with basically no user intervention and no strict need for a centralized server. It's not quite mobile-ready, but there's real work being one on an ocmal runtime for android [github.com], which is probably 99% of what you need to get unison working there as well.

cyphertite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464948)

Hi
give cyphertite a go. Written by some rather clever OpenBSD guys who are allowing beta testers right now. I personally have been using it for weeks without difficulty.

https://www.cyphertite.com

Enjoy

Ifolder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36464972)

maybe this could be a solution ifolder [kablink.org]. Not related to apple.

ownCloud (5, Informative)

reldruH (956292) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465000)

Sounds like you're looking for ownCloud. It's still under heavy development but the file storage functions work very well and it's accessible on Mac, Windows & Linux via webdav and from everywhere else via a web interface. There are also a couple of mobile apps in the works and it runs on a standard LAMP stack. http://owncloud.org/index.php/Main_Page [owncloud.org] And a blog post about the current status: http://owncloudtest.blogspot.com/2011/06/owncloud-20-just-merged-with.html [blogspot.com]

Ubuntu One (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465020)

The Ubuntu One service sounds like the way to go. The client is open source, it runs on Linux and Windows, the server side probably runs Linux. If you're worried about privacy, encrypt stuff before you send it to the cloud.

Evernote (1)

Unixnoteunuchs (990069) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465062)

Evernote (http://www.evernote.com) has stand-alone apps for PC, Mac and the most popular mobile devices, as well as a web clipper plug-in for Safari. Super-simple to use.

*boggle* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465080)

While I am guilty of using Dropbox for occasional data storage or quick picture snaps with my Android phone, I do watch out not to store anything important on there (or incriminating), no matter what the "privacy policy" may be.

"While I am guilty of using a screwdriver and a socket wrench to work on my car, I do watch out not to use them for hammering in nails or cutting glass."

Why on earth would you feel "guilty" over using a tool for the purpose it was designed for? Open Source has zero to do with the relative "wisdom" of putting your sensitive/incriminating data into the hands of a third party. If Dropbox were completely open source today, it would still be a colossally stupid idea to entrust your private or incriminating data to their care.

Want a FOSS file hosting service that you can administer and run yourself, has client access for nearly any platform, requires very little administration, and has multiple FOSS implementations?

It's called FTP.

FTP, WebDAV, SCP (1)

mdragan (1166333) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465130)

FTP is the traditional method, although kind of dated, some say not so secure. SCP is very simple, there are command line clients, fancy GUI clients, probably works with Android too. Checkout WebDAV too, the Apache webserver probably has a module supporting it, if not, you may find dedicated servers. Probably lots of clients support it.

Been Using.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465132)

Tonido for some time.
http://tonido.com/
Have a lot of hope for this one!

Unison (3, Informative)

human spam filter (994463) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465164)

If you have Linux PC that is accessible from the internet, then just use Unison (http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/). I use it all the time to synchronize my PC at work, my PC at home, and my laptop. It is quite fast, my synchronized folder is currently ~7GB and it takes maybe 10s to check for changes (not sure how Unison manages to do this).

personal nas tryecrypt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465182)

QNAP NAS and my cloud NAS service is an option giving you control of the data store its self. But being very security conscious read paranoid I still would be very careful with what I exposed to the internet and the potential interest of the likes of lulzsec / anonymous / big-brother / hackers trolling the interwebtubesetc .

use truecrypt to encrypt files before uploading

Tonido (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465218)

I would say host it yourself. I use Tonido [tonido.com] running on a SheevaPlug [tonidoplug.com] with a 1 TB USB disk. You can also get the software for x86 running Windows, MacOS X, or Linux. They have apps for BB, Android, iPhone, and Windows Phone 7. You can also remotely mount via WebDAV. And they give you a free dynamic host name, if you want it. My setup is fast enough to stream movies (and it is pretty easy with their web interface.) There is other useful stuff like calendars you can sync via iCal, a torrent manager, and a host for OpenID. There's also less useful stuff like a finance manager, blog, P2P photo sharing, and lousy backup suite.

Are there Dropbox clone for for ordinary webhosts? (1)

boldie (1016145) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465240)

I'm using shared web hosting. The webhost provides FTP access, perl, python, RoR, PHP, MySQL,Curl and all the usual stuff and a lot of storage and bandwith. Is there any OSS stuff I can install on the server that have good clients for win, linux and maybe even android?

I must be behind the times (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465256)

People actually have enough time these days in their daily lives to fill up their phones memory/micro sd cards on every day usage? Or is this just people trying to look busy so others think they have somthing going on in their lives.

If you take so many photos you abviously want some quality in the image so why not just get any of the 100's of digital pocket cameras out there?

WebDav (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465272)

I use SVN with WebDav. I can mount it on all of my devices, android, ipad, OSX, Windows, and Linux.
I get revision control.

It works incredibly well. I control how secure my environment is as well. While WebDav isnt the most secure, you could setup a VPN and hide it behind a firewall and use encryption.

nephthys (2)

higuita (129722) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465308)

For share with others, a perfect replacement for FTPs i use nephthys [netshadow.at]. Its based in webdav with a very simple web interface to allow users to share files. It auto expires shared files, so you do dont waste space with forgotten shares.

the git needs a few tweaks to work in a recent debian ( i will send a patch do the developer in a few days/weeks)... the .deb packages didnt worked for me

yet this is a very simple solution and works very in windows, macox and linux

it is almost unknown, but it saved me from thousand of user calls asking for help with ftp problems (clients, access, quotas and transfer)

Missing the point somewhat (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465346)

In this discussion a lot of people are totally overlooking the user-friendly aspects of Dropbox, which is really its main selling point (yeah, I realize it's Slashdot). Once set up, the end user doesn't even have to think about it. And the cross-platform clients work well enough that you don't have to really think about whether you're on a Windows box, a Mac, or an Android phone.

I wouldn't use Dropbox for anything sensitive, but it's great for stuff like keeping the family's grocery list. I even use it for some work-related meeting notes (these aren't secure - if anyone saw them it wouldn't cause any issues) - I can edit them on my computer, and when I go to the meeting (or grocery store) they're available on my phone without my having to remember to transfer them beforehand.

All that said - I'd love a equally user-friendly Dropbox alternative that I could host on my own server.

lipsync! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36465356)

Here's a project that allows you to self-host a service equivalent to DropBox: http://philcryer.github.com/lipsync/

Incriminating? On the cloud? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36465394)

If you have incriminating files, why are you storing them on the cloud at all? It seems doubtful that the fourth amendment would protect stuff stored via cloud computing. [wordpress.com] Maybe it was just an odd choice of words, or not "legally" incriminating, but if physically securing your files is an option, that would probably be better. I have a hard time putting my faith in data storage I can't see. My gut feeling is that for -most- circumstances, a USB drive on your person would be more secure than anything on the cloud.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...