this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
348 points (97.8% liked)

Selfhosted

40006 readers
674 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/12624334

Ente - Open sourcing our server

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cron@feddit.de 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I'm unsure about the end-to-end encryption aspect. While this feature is great for a cloud service like ente.io, it doesn't really help much in a selfhosted scenario - and might make backups more complicated. Any other opinions on this?

[–] Contend6248@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

Not only backups, but also migration

[–] anivia@lemmy.ml -4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Do you want your ISP to be able to spy on your private pictures when uploading them to your self-hosted server? End-to-end encryption is a no-brainer every time you transmit private data online

[–] cron@feddit.de 7 points 8 months ago

No, but thats what TLS does absolutely fine.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Their model is that the server doesn't know what the pictures are.

Which is fine. It's cool that it exists as an option, especially with someone else hosting your pictures. But it's not for me. I want my server to see my pictures so it can play with them.

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

so it can play with them

Papa jpeg: "this little jpeg went to market, this one stayed home, and this one went weeeeeee all the way along the download stream!"

Other little jpegs: "hoorayyyyyyy"

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

lol I want some of them served publicly. And at some point I want to do other processing of the contents of photos.

I have absolutely no opposition to the existence of an end to end encrypted photo service. If the process of adding new devices is easy enough, it's what I'd want from someone else hosting. But it's not what I need for personal hosting.

Which, again, is fine. There's absolutely a place for it. But the dude we're responding to is acting like not doing it is a liability when there's very good reason not to. (I think it's because of platforms trying to muddy the water of what end to end encryption means to pretend they do it and confusing him.)