| 1 |
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 14:51:25 +0100, Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I have a couple of customers for whom I've configured Samba running |
| 4 |
> on Linux as their file-servers. We want to do off-site back-up & I |
| 5 |
> like the idea of http://www.rsync.net/ which I read as recommended by |
| 6 |
> a user here or on Slashdot some considerable time ago. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> However I'm not clear on the best way to secure our data when storing |
| 9 |
> it on their servers - it's great to be able to use an open-source / |
| 10 |
> open-standards protocol such as SSH when transferring data, but this |
| 11 |
> does not protect it in the event that the off-site servers are |
| 12 |
> compromised. I am sure this isn't likely to happen but still it's |
| 13 |
> something we must consider. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> It seems to me that we can stuff all our data in a tarball & encrypt |
| 16 |
> it using PGP or similar (probably a symmetric algorithm (??) rather |
| 17 |
> than PGP, but you get the idea) but that would seem to prevent |
| 18 |
> incremental back-ups - using conventional back-up tools the single |
| 19 |
> encrypted tarball will be seen to have changed each night and so will |
| 20 |
> require completely uploading. Since our data could easily comprise |
| 21 |
> several gigs this is clearly unwieldy, and encrypting thousands of |
| 22 |
> single files and storing them remotely would seem to me to be clumsy |
| 23 |
> also. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I've recently switched from Strongspace to rsync.net and now use |
| 26 |
Duplicity to do the backups. This uses GPG to encrypt the backups and |
| 27 |
handles incremental backups. Duplicity is is portage with a good man |
| 28 |
page, there is also documentation on using it with rsync.net on their |
| 29 |
support pages as it is their recommended solution for encrypted backups. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
BASIC: Bill's Attempt to Seize Industry Control |
Archives