this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
123 points (98.4% liked)

Selfhosted

57094 readers
1434 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.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I have a 56 TB local Unraid NAS that is parity protected against single drive failure, and while I think a single drive failing and being parity recovered covers data loss 95% of the time, I'm always concerned about two drives failing or a site-/system-wide disaster that takes out the whole NAS.

For other larger local hosters who are smarter and more prepared, what do you do? Do you sync it off site? How do you deal with cost and bandwidth needs if so? What other backup strategies do you use?

(Sorry if this standard scenario has been discussed - searching didn't turn up anything.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The Backblaze option is something I've seriously considered.

Any reason this person didn't go with the $99/year personal backup plan? It says "unlimited" and it is for my household only, but maybe I'm missing something about how difficult it is to setup on Unraid or other NAS software. B2's $6/TB/mo rate would put me at $150/mo which is not great.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They only needed about 500GB.

And personal is for desktop systems. You have to use Backblazes macOS/Windows desktop application, and the setup is not zero-knowledge on Backblazes part. They literally advertise being able to ship you your files on a physical device if need be.

Which some people are ok with, but not what most of us would want.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You can ship encrypted files you know…..?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yes. That's not mutually exclusive with Backblaze having access to your backups.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Them having access to them is irrelevant if they’re encrypted. What’s the issue?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

You can do that with B2. Just use an application to upload that encrypts as it uploads.

The only way to achieve the same on the backup plan (because you have to use their desktop app) is to always have your entire system encrypted and never decrypt anything while the desktop app is performing a backup.

Did you not read what I said? You use their app, which copies files from your system as-is. Ensuring it never grabs a cleartext file is not practical.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That doesn’t mean it’s not encrypted on their servers…..

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Also doesn't mean it is. Or in a way where only you can decrypt it.

The chain of custody is unclear either way. You're not in control.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

No shit. But encryption isn't the same as zero-knowledge. Where by the time they handle the data in any way whatsoever, it's already encrypted, by you.

Do you not know what zero-knowledge means? Or are you so focused on my mentioning they'll ship data to you physically that what I actually said went over your head?

From the page you just linked:

  1. Implement encryption transparently so users don’t have to deal with it

  2. Allow users to change their password without re-encrypting their data

  3. In business environments, allow IT access to data without the user’s password

It's not zero-knowledge!

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That’s really not an issue though.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah. It's almost like I literally said that in my second comment.

Which some people are ok with, but not what most of us would want.

What gap in my knowledge are you trying to fill here?

I didn't even mention encryption in my second comment. Just that their backup plan isn't zero-knowledge.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

not what most of us want

Strongly disagree.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

With what?

That self hosting admins on lemmy probably care about their backups not being accessible to third parties?

I don't think you can claim that they wouldn't.

You can claim that YOU don't mind. But that's a sample size of one. And I'm not denying there are people who don't care.

I just don't think they're the type to be self-hosting in the first place.

And that still doesn't answer why the fuck you set out on this series of "well achuallys"?

It seems to me, you're still looking for something to correct me on.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Define “accessible” here. They’re encrypted …..

Being able to download an encrypted file is not the same as being able to download it and unencrypt it, which they can’t do.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

...

Sure they can. How else do they enable providing access to the content without the user password?

The data is secured against unauthorized access, but unlike zero-knowledge setups where the chain of custody is fully within user control, the user is not the only one authorized. And even if you are supposed to be, you cannot ensure that you actually are.

OF-FUCKING-COURSE the physical drives, and network traffic are encrypted. That's how you prevent unauthorized physical access or sniffing of data in-flight. That's nothing special.

But encryption is not some kind of magic thing that just automatically means anyone who shouldn't have access to the data, doesn't.

For that to actually be the case, you need solid opsec and known chain of custody. Ways of doing things that means the data stays encrypted end-to-end.

The personal backup plan doesn't have that.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Where do they provide access to the content without the user password?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

...

4

Explain to me how they couldn't. Without simply stating "it's encrypted".

On the B2 plan you can use open source solutions like Kopia to KNOW that data is encrypted on your system with keys only you have, before Backblaze ever sees it.

Explain to me, how the personal plan using their closed source application achieves the same.

Linking to a page where they say "it's secure" is not sufficient. Elaborate. In detail. To at least an equal extent I already have.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

So your whole point is that you shouldn't trust one of the biggest cloud backup companies on the planet when they say that your data is encrypted, with no proof that they're telling lies...........and you're asking me to prove that they're telling the truth?

The onus is on you to prove that they're telling lies, not on me to prove what they say is true.

They say this about computer backup on one of the pages I linked earlier:

Computer Backup Encryption

Data is encrypted on your computer—during transmission and while stored. Block unauthorized users from accessing your data by using a Personal Encryption Key (PEK) or use a 2048-bit public/private key to secure a symmetric AES-128 key. Data is transferred via HTTPS. Enhance your protection with two-factor verification via a TOTP (Time-based One Time Password).

Is that all a lie? Based on what?

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

No.

I'm saying 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% ≠ 100%

For some people that's close enough. For some of us it's not.

Prove otherwise. I dare you. I'm done putting in effort explaining the obvius to you. Your turn.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 20 minutes ago

So being encrypted before transmission and at rest isn't enough simply because someone at backblaze can send the encrypted files out to you on a HDD........

lol

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 1 points 3 days ago

You can't use the $99/year plan for that. The authorized client only works as a desktop application on Windows and MacOS.