• Quentinp
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah i see ignore my other comment - didn’t realize synology did remote backup as well as storage.

    • polygon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sorry if I wasn’t clear about that. My essential thinking with the NAS was: Cloud is nice, but how vulnerable are you if the Cloud provider turns evil?

      With Apple and Google, you’re basically screwed and there is nothing you can do.

      With a NAS, you own the server. You don’t rent it. You own it. You can hold the thing that stores all your private data in your own two hands.

      So what if the data center I host my backups on becomes evil? Well, then they find a bunch of encrypted blobs they can’t access while I move my backups to a different host. I’m not sure even the server hosting you’re talking about is as secure as that. What if they become evil? How much access do they have to your data? All “evil” takes is a single policy change from a suit who has no idea about actual tech. It happens all the time.

      Maybe that comes off as paranoid, but with all the data breaches and enshittification happening lately I feel much more secure having my data literally in my own two hands and a built-in defense against evil policy changes/government overreach for anything that must be hosted externally. Coupled with Tailscale for remote access I believe this as secure as you can get.

      And again, Synology was my choice for ease of use, but you can build a capable NAS from an old Optiplex on ebay for 200 bucks + drives.