[sf-lug] New Open Source Software Proposal

David Hinkle hinkle at cipafilter.com
Mon Mar 15 12:03:02 PDT 2010

True, with the encfs -> sshfs -> remote file system setup you have the advantage of a mounted directory full of files that's easy to browse.

With my idea you'd have to download a copy of the repository tree or some subtree within the repository to view it.   


-----Original Message-----
From: sf-lug-bounces at linuxmafia.com [mailto:sf-lug-bounces at linuxmafia.com] On Behalf Of David Rosenstrauch
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:10 PM
To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
Subject: Re: [sf-lug] New Open Source Software Proposal

On 03/15/2010 02:32 PM, David Hinkle wrote:
> David Rosenstrauch, Alex and I have been talking back and fourth
> about how to get what is probably a pretty standard scenario
> accomplished with open source tools.   We can't seem to find any pile
> of software that can make it happen, so I was thinking of writing it.
> First I want to solicit some feedback on my idea.
> The plan would be an rsync replacement.    Instead of syncing local
> files to a remote fileserver over ssh,  it would instead break the
> local files into chunks, independently encrypt each chunk, and sync
> those chunks over.   The chunks could be stored in a sqllight
> database along with the checksum of the original unencrypted contents
> of each chunk and the checksum of the unencrypted file.   We would
> key these chunks based on the encrypted filename.
> If we save the data in this manner, on subsequent backups, the client
> can ask for a list of checksums, compare those checksums to local
> files, and then transmit any chunks of those local files that may
> have been changed.
> This would means we should be able to get rsync like performance
> backing up to an encrypted datastore on a remote server that has no
> knowledge of the encryption key.   We would also get the awesome ease
> of use of rsync over ssh.   Any server you have shell access to and
> that you can upload files to you could use as a safe remote
> repository for your data.
> What do you guys think?  Usefull? Not usefull?  Would you use it?
> David

Had one thought:

Ideally the encfs -> sshfs -> remote file system setup would be even 
more preferable, as I would then be able to view the contents of the 
remote file system, download individual files, etc.

In the design you describe above, there's no way to browse or download 
the remote files using native linux userspace tools.  The only way to do 
it would be through this new tool.

So I'm thinking that what would really be ideal here would be for sshfs 
to somehow be enhanced to be able to support rsync'ing to the sshfs 
mounted directory.


sf-lug mailing list
sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/

More information about the sf-lug mailing list