Slashdot Mirror
Dropbox Is Dropping Support For All Linux File Systems Except Unencrypted Ext4 (dropboxforum.com)
New submitter rokahasch writes: Starting today, August 10th, most users of the Dropbox desktop app on Linux have been receiving notifications that their Dropbox will stop syncing starting November. Over at the Dropbox forums, Dropbox have declared that the only Linux filesystem supported for storage of the Dropbox sync folder starting the 7th of November will be on a clean ext4 file system. This basically means Dropbox drops Linux support completely, as almost all Linux distributions have other file systems as their standard installation defaults nowadays
-- not to mention encryption running on top of even an ext4 file system, which won't qualify as a clean ext4 file system for Dropbox (such as eCryptfs which is the default in, for example, Ubuntu for encrypted home folders).
The thread is trending heavily on Dropbox' forums with the forum's most views since the thread started earlier today. The cries from a large amount of Linux users have so far remained unanswered from Dropbox, with most users finding the explanation given for this change unconvincing. The explanation given so far is that Dropbox requires a file system with support for Extended attributes/Xattrs. Extended attributes however are supported by all major Linux/Posix complaint file systems. Dropbox has, up until today, supported Linux platforms since their services began back in 2007. A number of users have taken to Twitter to protest the move. Twitter user troyvoy88 tweets: "Well, you just let the shitstorm loose @Dropbox dropping support for some linux FS like XFS and BTRFS. No way in hell im going to reformat my @fedora #development station and removing encryption no way!"
Another user by the name of daltux wrote: "It will be time to say goodbye then, @Dropbox. I won't store any personal files on an unencrypted partition."
The thread is trending heavily on Dropbox' forums with the forum's most views since the thread started earlier today. The cries from a large amount of Linux users have so far remained unanswered from Dropbox, with most users finding the explanation given for this change unconvincing. The explanation given so far is that Dropbox requires a file system with support for Extended attributes/Xattrs. Extended attributes however are supported by all major Linux/Posix complaint file systems. Dropbox has, up until today, supported Linux platforms since their services began back in 2007. A number of users have taken to Twitter to protest the move. Twitter user troyvoy88 tweets: "Well, you just let the shitstorm loose @Dropbox dropping support for some linux FS like XFS and BTRFS. No way in hell im going to reformat my @fedora #development station and removing encryption no way!"
Another user by the name of daltux wrote: "It will be time to say goodbye then, @Dropbox. I won't store any personal files on an unencrypted partition."
You can, but then you lose synchronization, and good luck dealing with large files over a slow connection.
First, don't store your data with dropbox. It's not encrypted.
Second, why would dropbox care if the underlying volume is encrypted if the ext4 fs supports their extended attrs? Clearly this is BS.
Third, don't use fucking cloud storage providers that don't allow you control over the encryption of the storage, or with 0 encryption like dropbox.
Because people steal laptops all the time. They also steal USB keys with data you may be compelled to share with workmates.
Dropbox just re-creating functionality, built into Linux/Unix. Badly.
We have sshfs mounts, One-click "cloud" solutions, dynamic dns clients, etc, available in our package managers. And <$5 rentable web hosting. Hell, put a Linux "cloud server" image onto a microSD card, stick it in a Rasperry Pi, add a USB disk, enable dynamic DNS, and you haer your own Dropbox. With blackjack and hookers.
Dropbox was always a solution for a problem that never existed under Linux/Unix in the first place. (Excluding Ubunu-likes, obviously.)
Get a smarter spouse?
Though an email client's a client and a browser's a browser. If she has a problem doing so in Linux, how would a Mac be much different.
Dropbox reads the data unencrypted from an unlocked encrypted filesystem, so it has the unencrypted data anyway. That was my first thought, too, but it doesn't make much sense.
Backblaze B2.
Or SpiderOak.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
The normal setup is encryption after partition. Meaning dropbox is operating on the unencrypted data. Sure dropbox may re-encrypt on their end (and probably in flight too). But that whole thing is encryption on their terms (Dropbox) not yours. Meaning as strong as they like it, and key-management as they like it.
All the linux encrypted volume stuff is meaningless to the files stored on the Dropbox Cloud.
That said, this decision my Dropbox is troublesome. They have a really good cross-platform product that syncs better than most of the existing solutions. I don't think this a wise decision.
A current (paid) Dropbox user, watching carefully...
Why can't they? They were up until now.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Isn't dropbox sync a userland application? Why does it care about the underlying FS?
Dropbox likes to worm its way into the operating system and get access it doesn’t need - I can only speculate that the sleazeballs are doing something behind the scenes with that access in an attempt to furtively monetize their users’ data.
I stopped using Dropbox on OS X when they got caught adding themselves into the system-wide accessibility permissions table without asking. Thing is, the service works just fine without that (I did it for a couple weeks, until I got tired of denying Dropbox’s repeated requests to “fix” my system). So why are they asking for it - can’t be for any reason the end user would want.
#DeleteChrome
why would you trust a cloud storage provider to keep a copy of it?
Because the odds of someone directly hacking my account at dropbox and sucking my data out are lower than the odds of one of the many hotel staff who walk into my room unannounced lifting my laptop. It's like when someone asks why I have an encrypted external drive that auto-decrypts when connected to my computer without a password: The odds of the drive going missing without the computer are higher than the odds of losing both + the computer unlock password.
Security isn't an on or off thing. It's a sliding scale of risk profiles and associated mittigations.