- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/12284817
There’s a new version of Nephele WebDAV server (also on Docker Hub) that supports using an S3 compatible server as storage and encrypting filenames and file contents.
This essentially means you can build your own cloud storage server leveraging something like Backblaze B2 for $6/TB/month, and that data is kept private through encryption. That’s cheaper than Google Drive, and no one can snoop on your files.
You must log in or register to comment.
(In case the text doesn’t show, here it is.)
There’s a new version of Nephele WebDAV server (also on Docker Hub) that supports using an S3 compatible server as storage and encrypting filenames and file contents.
This essentially means you can build your own cloud storage server leveraging something like Backblaze B2 for $6/TB/month, and that data is kept private through encryption. That’s cheaper than Google Drive, and no one can snoop on your files.
This is relevant to my interests, thanks. Looks like it’s pretty early stages though?
It’s stable enough to use in production, but the internal APIs might change, so I wouldn’t recommend writing your own adapters/plugins for it.
It’s still labeled as “alpha” because not all of the features are don’t yet. Once CardDAV support is added, it will get bumped to beta.
Looks like it might rain
New Lemmy Post: Nephele now supports S3 and file encryption (https://lemmy.world/post/12284887)
Tagging: #SelfHosted(Replying in the OP of this thread (NOT THIS BOT!) will appear as a comment in the lemmy discussion.)
I am a FOSS bot. Check my README: https://github.com/db0/lemmy-tagginator/blob/main/README.md
Looks cool :) but AL2? no thank you !
I’m not familiar with the term AL2. What is that?
Apache license 2.0
Ah. I don’t know why anyone would be put off by that.
Me neither, but I’d love to hear those arguments.
- The MIT and Apache licenses are permissive licenses that allow developers to use the licensed code in proprietary projects without having to disclose the source code.
I understand that some projects needs these kind of license to protect their code, I get it. But this will most of the time shift the project to a closed proprietary/paid service over time… leaving the open source community with a strange feeling of being abused.
It’s not always the case, but it happened in the past, leaving people to fork the project and strating over.
-
Licensees may redistribute Derivative Work under different terms.
-
Licensees do not have to distribute the source code alongside with their Derivative Work.
