How easy is it to self-host? I don't see any Docker instructions.
https://gitlab.com/timvisee/send
P.s. Kind of odd that the site links to Github, but the GH repo is only a mirror of the official Gitlab.
https://old.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1bwqxit/is_ther...
And pwndrop: https://github.com/kgretzky/pwndrop
And lots of others.
The reason to use Bitwarden could be that you already trust it with something else, and could have taken time and audit that it is indeed legit, or trust others to complain loudly if they find something wrong with the code. Personally, I’d self-host it (or the open source, lighter on resources Vaultwarden), just as an additional safeguard.
Actually since it says forked it implies that Mozilla maintains a closed-source version. No, it was cancelled.
EDIT: I'm on mobile, apparently it's 500 MB on desktop.
"The Thunderbird team was very sad when Firefox Send was shut down. Firefox Send made it possible to send large files easily, maybe easier than any other tool on the Internet. So we’re reviving it, but not without some nice improvements. Thunderbird Send will not only allow you to send large files easily, but our version also encrypts them" - https://blog.thunderbird.net/2024/10/thunderbird-annual-repo...
https://web.archive.org/web/20200226024845/https://www.wired...
Sometimes devs & teams of devs wait until their code is finished to put it online. I tend not to – most of my unfinished code open source code is online. I understand the pros/cons of each way though.
Anyone who got the link should be able to delete the file.
This should deter one from using the file sharing tool as free hosting for possibly bad content. One can also build a bot that deletes every file found on public internet.
The combination of limited file availability (reducing the ability to report bad actors), as well as Firefox urls being inherently trusted within orgs (bypassing a lot of basic email/file filtering/scanning), was the reason it became so popular for criminals to use. Like we've seen in the spearfishing attacks in India[1].
[1]: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/research/2020/06/india-hum...
Basically, base64 encode the file, inject it in the URL and then allows you to share it with other people.
Like firefox send but some version of authentication via email? I am aware that i would need a way to send emails so the emailaddresses get authentication
It's discouraging to think that privacy&security solutions for good people might end up being used primarily by bad people, but I don't know whether that's the situation, nor what the actual numbers are.
Imagine some computer work with a class of high school kids, where a teacher has to send them a file... there will be maybe three full downloads max, before someone presses the "delete" button.
Sure, it wouldn't work for a large public setting... but it'd work for many other settings.
"We don't know the contents of the files on our server, so we can't know that is was illegal"
"Fine, delete that file, and we won't charge you for possession this time. Now that you know your service is used for this illegal material, you need to stop hosting material like that."
"How, if we don't know what's in the file sent to our server?"
"... maybe don't take random files you don't know about, and share them on the open web with anonymous users?"
I like keeping my software secure and up to date, but I dread every TB upgrade, wondering what stupid cosmetic change will trip me up this time.
Imagine an image generation model whose loss function is essentially "make this other model classify your image as CSAM."
I'm not entirely convinced whether it would create actual CSAM instead of adversarial examples, but we've seen other models of various kinds "reversed" in a similar vein, so I think there's quite a bit of risk there.
I find this applications like this very useful to self-host. Sometimes I need to send someone a file quickly and this can come in handy. I don't need to allow uploads from everyone and I can just whitelist IPs for the upload URL.
At present I'm using Project Send.
https://github.com/j1elo/slow-network
Your article is very interesting and details some practical use cases, thanks! I will read it to see if there are any new ideas to incorporate.
Say we're 8 friends traveling through the middle of Greenland (read: no niceties like WiFi), and on the evening we want to share the photos of the day with everyone else.
In short, an evolution of the myriad of file sending copycats that exist: the same idea but for a shared bucket of files (I don't think doing N individual shares fits the bill, that'd just be a poor man's solution for the lack of a proper alternative)
Commenting this in hopes that the HN popular wisdom knows about something similar! :)
Studies on the subject (very few actually, if you have intel on that matter, let me know) have already been conducted and reveal that a simple email with an attachment of 1MB produces around 15 grams of CO2[1]. Obviously, this figure increases with the size of the email. This is the case, for example, when the email includes large attachments or if the email is sent to several recipients.
With the use of the IMAP protocol, one email sent has at least 6 permanent copies (from the sent item in the sender email client to the inbox of the recipient, through sender and recipients email server which hopefully have long term archiving).
A solution like firefox send with automatic shredding of the file after an expiration period to replace email attachment would drastically reduce the consequences of email usage on greenhouse gas emissions. It would also resolve other issues related to sending files by email, but that would make this post waaaayyy to long :-)
[1] http://www.helixee.me/limpact-ecologique-des-e-mails/ (in French)
I think environmentalists need to find more effective focuses than these if we want our goals to be achieved and for us to be taken remotely seriously
Hope you have fun playing Sonic I guess?
No seriously, just extrapolate that for a second and try to tell me with a straight face that all the gamer kids playing with whatever it takes to render a modern game, and by the logic I'm reading from that french article those kid are basically each a victorian age factory spewing out so much carbon gunk we're going to need to bring back chimney sweeps, like yeah I don't really think that the logic of restricting emails is going to change a lot when people are literally just out there playing video games.
I'm being "defensive" because as an environmentalist I think that we need to get real and target the real emitters. It's mostly military functions, international shipping, and still going and generating power in the first place using non renewable sources that maybe we should be focusing on rather than this BP-orchestrated carbon footprint bullshit that they foisted on people as a psyop to convince us that we're the problem that need to change
It's not letting me reply to your further comment but here's some links for you to really 'get it'
https://www.clf.org/blog/the-truth-about-carbon-footprints/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oi...
2. local copy in the send item once sent
3. a copy on the sender email server
4. a copy on the receiver email server
5. a copy on the inbox of the receiver
6. add one if the file is saved as a local copy on the sender computer
And this does not take into consideration backups (like local backups and email server backups). Also, the number increases obviously by the number of recipients (points 4, 5 and 6).
(edited for layout)
In general I dont get this line where people think this stuff is all just a huge PR (as press relations) issue. It doesnt matter what you or I think. We are kinda way past that. There is no cultural battle to win, and even if there was, it really wouldn't matter!
Isn't this - more or less - already happening?
Perpetrators that don't find _some way_ of creating/sharing csam that's low risk get arrested. The "fear of being in jail" is already driving these people to invent/seek out ways to score a 0.1.
Agreed, this is the key need! For sharing individual files, i think there are plenty of decent options - including this fork of FF Send, which by the way i have used and works perfectly fine. But, that whole desire to have a shared "bucket" or as you called it "deposit of files" or something similar, where a group of people can use as an area to constantly and consistently share files - and i would add to have those files be organized in a meaningful way - is still not something that i see executed really well.
For my family, its pretty simple in that have an existing shared area within our Onedrive, and manage files there...but there are at least 2 problems with that: 1) there isn't an embedded chat/communication mechanism...so files are separated from context of activity; and 2) what happens if the group that wants to share the bucket isn't family, or not connected on a single service like onedrive?
For simple sharing of files *that are ephemeral/not intended to be preserved nor organized properly* lots of people simply use a chat service. I use a dedicated, persistent room within matrix (yes, that matrix which is used for chat/instant messaging), and use it as my own little pastebin, file transfer/sharing system, etc. But, that approach lacks an organizability/findability of whatever files are loaded into it. So, sharing could be achieved for many participants via chat room, but there won't be a nice, easy way to find files shared from say X weeks ago.
I know that i added chat onto what was mentioned about having an area/deposit of files to share, but i feel having such a bucket in isolation may not be enough...i think some combination of chat or communication AS WELL AS an easy to organize bucket of sharing files is the key...i feel that once that nut has been cracked in a way that provides great UX, then whatever that service will be can have the potential to swallow at least a few existing services like dropbox, onedrive, google drive, etc....or, at least for some non-trivial percentage of users out there.
Defaults:
- Multicast UDP for discovery
- HTTP for file transfer
Will work in an office, but not for a email transfer to a customer
They did bust a site owner despite Tor, though. That story's true.
And not "you" unless you are operating a service and this evidence is found in your systems.
This is how "g-men" misinformation of born
It's 4 total if both sides cache the file indefinitely and 2 otherwise.
edit:
Okay, I see, you are talking about physical files.
Sure then there might be up to 6 copies of the file.
If it's just a general cynical "all gubernment is bad and full of pedos" then I'm not sure what the comment adds to this discussion.