One of the nicer bits of borg is the ability to restrict it to append-only mode, which limits the damage compromised hosts can do. e.g in authorized_keys:
command="/usr/local/bin/borg serve --append-only --restrict-to-path=/home/backup/bla",restrict ...
I use this with passphrase-free ssh keys to allow automated backups without permitting the destruction of any existing backups.Do you get enough control do to that on rsync.net?
"Do you get enough control do to that on rsync.net?"
Yes. You have your own .ssh folder in your account and can edit (upload) your keys as you see fit.
Also, if you have our ZFS snapshots enabled, those are immutable/readonly - so even if you aren't using a sophisticated tool like borg, you still have snapshots of your data that are immune to attack - even from someone who knows all of your credentials.
Re:Cryptographic Right Answers
by blattimwind on Tuesday April 10, 2018 @04:22AM
(#16799879)
Borg's encryption scheme is weak and not suited for multiple nodes using the same repo.
This isn't zero-knowledge. Please use this opportunity to educate the public instead of muddying the term for the sake of marketing buzzwords.
Re:Cryptographic Right Answers
by CiPHPerCoder on Wednesday April 04, 2018 @12:29PM
(#16756294)
To add to this comment: https://paragonie.com/blog/2016/08/crypto-misnomers-zero-kno...
borg[1] has been referred to as "the holy grail of backups"[2] and is supported at rsync.net.[3]
The end result is encrypted, zero knowledge remote backups on a ZFS filesystem that you can SSH to.
I think everyone here knows all about rsync.net, but here are some examples:[4]
[1] https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/[2] https://www.stavros.io/posts/holy-grail-backups/
[3] http://rsync.net/products/attic.html
[4] http://www.rsync.net/resources/howto/remote_commands.html