duplicity-team team mailing list archive

[Andreas Schmidt <question689862@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #689862 on Duplicity changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/689862

Andreas Schmidt gave more information on the question:
Dear ede,

thank you for your quick reply. You are right, by hindsight a lot of my questions are 
focusing more on gnupg and its integration into duplicity, than on duplicity itself.

I should probably reformulate my questions:

- Did you or someone else in the team come across a scenario, in which it is useful to not having 
  to expose the private encryption key for backups with duplicity?
  This is what I meant when I wrote at the beginning, that I might be missing something obvious:
  I agree with you, that if the system is compromised, the backup is likely to be a lost cause too.
  Therefore, even with all my pondering summarized above, I still struggle to understand, why
  someone would want to go down that rabbit hole.

- Also related to https://lists.launchpad.net/duplicity-team/msg02374.html and the remark
  regarding verifying the backups, what is your or the teams opinion regarding the usage of
  Amazon Glacier, especially because version 0.8 seems to support it out of the box?
  I am aware, that periodical verification of backups is not limited to duplicity as well, the reason
  for this question is, that I am struggling to reconcile this requirement, the statements in
  the linked post and the flag "--s3-use-glacier".

- Finally, if you had the time and leisure to read through my admittedly somewhat circuitous
  insights outlined above, I would be grateful if you let me know, if you think that additional
  aspects are incomplete or incorrect, besides the fact, that the destination would have to be 
  "append only" and that it is likely unavailing in any case.


Thank you for your time and thoughts, best regards
Andreas

-- 
You received this question notification because your team duplicity-team
is an answer contact for Duplicity.