Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Magic Wormhole: get things from one computer to another, safely

    (github.com)
    816 points tosh | 20 comments | 17 Aug 24 16:59 UTC | HN request time: 4.312s | source | bottom
    1. smusamashah ◴[17 Aug 24 17:53 UTC] No.41276443[source]▶
    There are a few others

    p2pcopy https://github.com/psantosl/p2pcopy

    pcp https://github.com/dennis-tra/pcp

    wormhole-william https://github.com/psanford/wormhole-william

    replies(4): >>41276464 #>>41276561 #>>41276624 #>>41281131 #
    2. singularity2001 ◴[17 Aug 24 17:55 UTC] No.41276464[source]▶
    scp
    replies(1): >>41276490 #
    3. dgrove ◴[17 Aug 24 17:57 UTC] No.41276490[source]▶
    scp has the assumption that you have a login on the computers you're trying to share data from. wormhole allows for sharing with others without providing login access to the computer
    replies(1): >>41276630 #
    4. haunter ◴[17 Aug 24 18:04 UTC] No.41276561[source]▶
    And more

    https://github.com/mat-sz/filedrop

    https://github.com/saljam/webwormhole

    https://github.com/schollz/croc

    https://github.com/dutchcoders/transfer.sh

    https://github.com/timvisee/send

    https://github.com/schlagmichdoch/pairdrop

    https://github.com/SnapDrop/snapdrop

    replies(3): >>41276664 #>>41277617 #>>41283158 #
    5. tptacek ◴[17 Aug 24 18:12 UTC] No.41276624[source]▶
    wormhole-william is just a Go implementation of Magic Wormhole; those are the two you should use, Magic Wormhole and wormhole-william.
    6. __MatrixMan__ ◴[17 Aug 24 18:12 UTC] No.41276630{3}[source]▶
    Right. Also you may have to reconfigure some firewalls to use scp.

    Typically, a firewall allows outbound connections without needing an explicit entry for the protocol, and in the case of magic wormhole, both sides are an outbound connection. So it passes right through.

    If you've got security-minded folk managing that sort of thing for you, it's possible that magic wormhole will upset them for this reason. More for policy/compliance reasons than actual security ones.

    replies(1): >>41276972 #
    7. sltkr ◴[17 Aug 24 18:16 UTC] No.41276664[source]▶
    10 different tools? Ridiculous! We need to develop one universal tool that covers everyone's use cases.
    replies(2): >>41276710 #>>41276732 #
    8. nobody9999 ◴[17 Aug 24 18:24 UTC] No.41276710{3}[source]▶
    https://xkcd.com/927/

    ;)

    9. tptacek ◴[17 Aug 24 18:27 UTC] No.41276732{3}[source]▶
    And then we'll have 11.
    replies(2): >>41277638 #>>41278165 #
    10. layer8 ◴[17 Aug 24 18:52 UTC] No.41276972{4}[source]▶
    Both problems can be worked around by having a third, general-purpose host where both source/destination hosts can scp to/from. Not quite as straightforward because you have to copy twice and do it from both sides, but has the benefit of not having to install bespoke software.
    replies(2): >>41277364 #>>41278149 #
    11. TacticalCoder ◴[17 Aug 24 19:46 UTC] No.41277364{5}[source]▶
    > Both problems can be worked around by having a third, general-purpose host where both source/destination hosts can scp to/from.

    Yup it's what I do, that 3rd computer having a fixed IP. Conveniently that computer can also keep a copy of the file(s).

    Linux/BSDs/OS X (which is kinda a Unx too) all come stock with scp* and I don't really use Windows, so I'm a happy camper.

    12. smusamashah ◴[17 Aug 24 20:18 UTC] No.41277617[source]▶
    I have a list of now 22 browser based p2p sharing tools that i shared here a few times in similar threads https://gist.github.com/SMUsamaShah/fd6e275e44009b72f64d0570...
    replies(1): >>41277996 #
    13. apantel ◴[17 Aug 24 20:20 UTC] No.41277638{4}[source]▶
    That would further increase the need for a single standard.
    14. pogue ◴[17 Aug 24 21:11 UTC] No.41277996{3}[source]▶
    I find myself using Send Anywhere [1] all the time. I couldn't find documentation on how the files are transferred or if they're uploaded to their cloud, but it's very handy. They claim the files are encrypted in transmission, but don't give details & could just be talking about SSL.[2]

    When you choose the files you want to transfer, it gives you a 6 digit code or a QR code. Once you enter that, the files are transferred! It's available for most all major platforms, but isn't open source. [3]

    I haven't read their privacy policy. Frankly, I'd rather not know...

    [1] https://send-anywhere.com/

    [2] https://support.send-anywhere.com/hc/en-us/articles/11500385...

    [3] https://support.send-anywhere.com/hc/en-us/articles/11500388...

    15. __MatrixMan__ ◴[17 Aug 24 21:31 UTC] No.41278149{5}[source]▶
    I think you could use an ssh tunnel between the intermediary and the destination such that the scp connection from the source makes it all the way through in one go, rather than leaving files on the intermediary. You'd be forwarding to the ssh port via ssh, so it would be a confusing bit of sshception.

    If I tried to actually come up with the actual commands for this, I'm sure I'd burn a whole afternoon on fiddling with it.

    replies(1): >>41278806 #
    16. PhilippGille ◴[17 Aug 24 21:33 UTC] No.41278165{4}[source]▶
    Pretty sure that was the intended joke, as many people came across the XKCD [1] already.

    [1] https://xkcd.com/927/

    replies(1): >>41278709 #
    17. gfody ◴[17 Aug 24 22:56 UTC] No.41278709{5}[source]▶
    not to mention https://xkcd.com/949 which inspired many and more of these
    18. layer8 ◴[17 Aug 24 23:13 UTC] No.41278806{6}[source]▶
    This either requires the destination to accept inbound connections, or you'd need a permanent SSH tunnel, both of which you'd probably want to avoid.
    19. michaelmior ◴[18 Aug 24 09:06 UTC] No.41281131[source]▶
    And https://github.com/SpatiumPortae/portal
    20. jimmySixDOF ◴[18 Aug 24 16:03 UTC] No.41283158[source]▶
    I was going to say SnapDrop was discontinued but I see it is back again thanks for the reminder this must be the third or fourth time I have thought they pulled the plug and see it get fixed back to normal bravo developers !!