gocryptfs VS BorgBackup

I'm looking to improve my documents syncing setup. Currently I'm using owncloud, but that seems overkill for just files syncing and it requires maintenance, so I gave Syncthing a look. The "Untrusted device encryption" was not appealing to me because I'm not convinced by the security aspects yet, and also because it is in beta for now. I used gocryptfs [1] in the past and was quite happy with it, so I'm planning to use it on top of Syncthing to have files synced encrypted. As far as I have read this setup (Syncthing + gocryptfs) seems to be used by several people and has already been discussed by gocryptfs' author, who recommended a `-sharedstorage` flag for such use case [2]. Reading [3] I think gocryptfs is more suited for files syncing than cryfs. I'm aware that the metadata (file size, structure, …) of my files are not encrypted but that's a compromise I'm ready to make.

I would be happy to hear about opinions about this approach.

[1] https://nuetzlich.net/gocryptfs/

[2] https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/549#issuecomment...

[3] https://www.cryfs.org/comparison

If you want selective encryption, rather than full drive encryption, to be less conspicuous: gocryptfs (Linux)/cppcryptfs (Windows).

https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs might be a solution. I dont use it, tried to for some backups but ran into some issues unrelated to the solution itself but with my backup solution.

JungleDisk was backup software I used ~2008 that allowed mounting S3. They were bought by Rackspace and the product wasn't updated. Seems to be called/part of Cyberfortress now.

Later I used Panic's Transmit Disk but they removed the feature.

Recently I'd been looking at s3fs-fuse to use with gocryptfs but haven't actually installed it yet!

https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse

https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs

I think the fundamental issue seem to maybe be the changing inode numbers with things like gocryptfs. Git annex needs those to be static as far as I can tell.

Veracrypt is stil a fine option but if you want to have regular backups, it's not that great imo. Say you want to automatically backup your files to some cloud without having to trust their promises of privacy, you could use something like gocryptfs. It creates a folder of your files but in encrypted form. You then copy / sync that folder using any backup program.

A comparison gocryptfs would be appreciated, since this software, at first glance, has no differentiating features from it.

https://nuetzlich.net/gocryptfs/

There is a pretty nice project gocryptfs that instead of encrypting container, it substitute on the fly virtual filesystem that encrypts content and file objects. So, if you would share to cloud that virtual filesystem, you don't sacrifice a byte on your system.

i use - and recommend - "borgbackup": for example with the "vorta" graphical frontend

* https://www.borgbackup.org/

* https://vorta.borgbase.com/install/windows/

just my 0.02€

I used this many, many years ago but switched to Borg[0] about five years ago. Duplicity required full backups with incremental deltas, which meant my backups ended up using too much disk space. Borg lets you prune older backups at will, because of chunk tracking and deduplication there is no such thing as an incremental backup.

[0] https://www.borgbackup.org/

Currently, I'm auto-backing it up with borg (push mode) through wireguard tunnel to NAS behind ISP's CGNAT. The borg takes care of deduplication in SQL file, so incremental update (even in append-only mode) is very small for PostgreSQL dump.

Borg 2 has been in development for nearly a year and a half [1] and may probably be released early next year, i.e., early 2024 (just a guess, seeing that even RC1 is not yet released and seems to have a lot of work to be done).

Does anyone know how Borg 1.x and 2 would compare to Kopia?

[1]: https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/6602

You could use borgbackup.