I’d be surprised if they didn’t, but even then no system is 100% secure. I would like to assume that Dropbox has carefully planned systems in place, but one can never assume anything.
But if the employee can easily decrypt data and cover his or her tracks, Dropbox users are not happy. When the Dropbox employee wants to steal your data, the question I have is how easily can the employee get the keys to decrypt the data? If there are systems in place to limit employee access to the decryption keys (perhaps multiple authorizations from key managers coupled with logging of access attempts and active monitoring), then the rogue employee is probably going to be defeated. Bad guy is defeated, and all is well with the world.
When the outside bad guy tries to review your data, he will get nothing but the unreadable gibberish that is your encrypted data. In each of these scenarios, the data starts off encrypted. The person presenting a court order or subpoena requiring Dropbox to turn over your data.The Dropbox employee who wants to steal your data (again, for whatever reason).The outside bad guy who wants to break in and steal your data for whatever reason.For lawyers (or anyone concerned about privacy), there are three potential bogeys in this situation: Dropbox’s security policy is clear: they manage the keys. The crux of the issue here is who controls the keys to decrypt the data on Dropbox’s servers. This is good news, but it does not completely resolve lawyers’ security/confidentiality concerns. How does this benefit from BT? I don't get it.A reader directed my attention to the fact that Dropbox now says that the data stored on its servers is encrypted. The bandwidth limit is going to be the slower of the two local connection. What good is that? You can use ANYTHING to do that, including tools built into your OS of choice. The only thing this service will be used for is warez and kiddie porn.Įdit never mind I see they are using it to sync between two computers owned by the same person.
Your computer crashes and now you need to get the thumbdrives back, in a way that ensures you got access to every person who carries at least one of each chunks? Meanwhile these people might have died or moved away, or just don't want to give them back. Then you divide all those USB thumb drives amongst all the people in your neighborhood. So it's like turning all your files into thousands of chunks, and then copying those chunks to little USB thumb drives in a way that makes any one chunk appear on several drives. This is better if you want to sync any significant amount of data that you don't want 'on the cloud'. If you only have a few files (<5GB worth), then DropBox might be better since they have it backed up for you (also assuming you trust Dropbox with your data). This is a great replacement for people that used to use services like Foldershare. It's just on machines you sync the data across. If it does, then this is useful for that use case but means that your computer is presumably going to be storing data for other people, which is kind of annoying. You'll need to find another computer and specifically add it to the folder in order for that to work, which is kind of a hassle. If it doesn't, then this doesn't really duplicate DropBox, et al, for one of the prime use cases, which is having a backup in case something happens to the original files.
Does the data live anywhere other than on computers that have the secret? For example, when you add something does it send it to random other users (encrypted with the secret, presumably)?
0 kommentar(er)
