They all suck and should be avoided.

You entered a thread explicitly about E2E encryption started by ShortN0te

That person replied to a thread I started, not the other way around. It was never about E2E. It was always about encrypted backups.

It could have a encrypted backup feature but it won’t change it’s fundamental purpose

It’s not supposed to. It shouldn’t.

They’re meant to be workable in other tools like QGIS, Strava or Komoot. Encrypting them would break that entirely.

Then make it optional? Or don’t, I don’t care.

deleted by creator

Halfway through you shifted to encrypted local backups

I never shifted anything. I was talking about encrypted backups on a server. These can be encrypted locally before being synced to a server.

you first called ‘single-party encryption’

Nope, you literally just made that up. I didn’t say that and I don’t even know what that means.

I said it wasn’t realistic in the context of the selfhosted backends we were discussing.

…but it is.

And yes, lots of apps do encrypted backups because they are backup apps. Colota isn’t.

My suggestion was that it could be…

The existing export is for tools like QGIS or selfhosted backends and encrypting that data would break that use case entirely.

You already have local backups that could be encrypted and then synced to a general storage server.

Encrypted import/export for backup is a separate feature that doesn’t exist yet, so there’s nothing here that’s badly implemented.

I said literally nothing about your implementation. You’re imagining things. Please read more attentively.

Never heard of “The President”, what’s that?

He lives by the narcissist’s prayer 🙏

Most likely just stolen from another poster without attribution.

“Oh yeah well we’ll double blockade the strait! What now, losers!?”

The main issue isn’t even the technology itself, it’s that it’s Meta and owned by the Zuck.

There are a thousand corporations tripping over themselves to out-horrify the public.

I’m sure there are ways to engineer this so the data stays on device and use it for specific scientific purposes exclusively.

I’m sure there are but if you see one in public, how would you know? Best just to ban them all.

them because the tech wasn’t there yet 10 years ago.

That’s not true. They didn’t take off because they boiled the frog too fast. They were rejected by polite society. That society is gone.

…in pursuit of what?

If you watch older videos of him from the 80s he actually looks fairly sane. He’s been experiencing Trump Derangement Syndrome for decades though.

What debate? Anyone suggesting otherwise is just being disingenuous or are themselves insane or a lunatic.

Its historically used by brits to refer to Americans in general.

I don’t know what you want man

I honestly don’t know how to be more clear about this. It’s not complicated. I want client-side encryption, man.

i didn’t realize this was one of those “digging my heels in because I don’t know how to be wrong” threads

LOL I didn’t know that either, but here you are!

You just asked the creator of an exclusively client-side app whether they support encryption.

Client-side encryption is not a novel concept.

something like Keepass where the file itself is encrypted, you have to use some form of auth to decrypt it on use

That’s significantly more complicated and time-consuming.

LOL clickbait is all they do on this channel.

Imagine being so arrogant that you demand everyone around you expressly approve of a war that you yourself don’t even know why you started or how to end it. Can you even fathom?

Not everyone is as informed as you, antifa_ceo

No one is talking about a phone or a PC, we’re talking about a server.

Also phones and PCs are only encrypted at rest.