Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by alanfranz 1062 days ago
You need a remote service that keeps backup readonly. You’re not covering attack scenarios if you just use raw object storage from your client machine.

I have written about this some time ago if you’re interested: https://www.franzoni.eu/ransomware-resistant-backups/

2 comments

I'd classify that under "ease of use" - you can do it with S3 yourself (your post is a pretty good explanation of the how, from a quick skim), or you can just use tarsnap and not worry about it.
You can see from my post that doing that _properly_ is quite convoluted and requires a good deal of technical skills.

So it's not just ease of use. It's actual _functionality_ to me - getting from raw object storage to a fully working, attack-resistant backup strategy, is not trivial; hence, comparing tarsnap (or rsync.net, or borgbase, or whatever) to B2 or S3 makes little to no sense.

You _could_ compare it to crashplan or backblaze personal backup if you like, but IIRC those don't work for *nix systems, only for Win and Mac.

How tarsnap keeps backups readonly ? Just having service being a barrier is not enough
It supports distinct authentication keys with read, write, and/or delete permissions for the same data protected by a given encryption key.

Those restrictions are enforced by the service.

So one bug and it is gone.

Thought it used readonly features of S3/Glacier or something..