- Mar 18, 2007
- 11,936
- 147
- 106
I hate how you need to use hard drive or ssd space to use encryption. Like for example I need a 8 tb drive to store 8 tb of data on the cloud
If you don't need everyday access to all of that 8TB of data, and assuming of course I'm understanding the situation correctly, why not have multiple encrypted file containers? It would also cut down on unnecessary data uploading (ie. re-uploading an entire 8TB file container because you made a few KB's worth of changes).I hate how you need to use hard drive or ssd space to use encryption. Like for example I need a 8 tb drive to store 8 tb of data on the cloud
He is talking about online backup service like BackBlaze and not like Google Drive.Which cloud requires that? Just encrypt a folder with WinRAR using a strong password and upload that.
BackBlaze doesn't have a limit AFAIK. Curious which service requires an exact amount of storage space as the whole encrypted drive space rather than the actual amount of data.He is talking about online backup service like BackBlaze and not like Google Drive.
Not limit in terms of capacity, rather, you cannot upload a file than delete from your local drive. They scan to check just to make sure you are using their space as backup of a local file and not a cloud file dump.BackBlaze doesn't have a limit AFAIK. Curious which service requires an exact amount of storage space as the whole encrypted drive space rather than the actual amount of data.
I don't have experience with their service but if they actually read every single byte for verifying rather than comparing the filename/hash, that would be a LOT of bandwidth wasted.They scan to check just to make sure you are using their space as backup of a local file and not a cloud file dump.
I don't have experience with their service but if they actually read every single byte for verifying rather than comparing the filename/hash, that would be a LOT of bandwidth wasted.