News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Signal Secure Backups. Parent comment

Re:Signal Secure Backups by h4ck_th3_pl4n3t on Monday September 08, 2025 @04:53PM (#45173828)
How can an encrypted backup be incremental if it's supposed to be never decrypted on-remote-machines?

Ever thought about that?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by codethief on Monday September 08, 2025 @06:50PM (#45175144)
I'm sure if borgbackup can pull this off, Signal can, too?

The solution is to split up your data into encrypted chunks, and only upload the new ones.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by tremon on Monday September 08, 2025 @05:02PM (#45173941)
Why would you need remote data to create an incremental backup?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by palebluedot on Monday September 08, 2025 @04:58PM (#45173895)
That seems pretty trivial to implement
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by h4ck_th3_pl4n3t on Monday September 08, 2025 @05:21PM (#45174171)
I dare you to implement this then, where others have failed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by Sesse__ on Monday September 08, 2025 @05:38PM (#45174362)
tar --listed-incremental=foo.snar -cf - . | gpg --encrypt -r <key> > nightly.gpg

You're welcome.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Signal Secure Backups by zorgmonkey on Tuesday September 09, 2025 @01:20PM (#45185207)
Why wouldn't it be possible? All it really means is that you need to do the work to make incremental entirely on the local side and not on the remote side.
[ Parent | on HN ]