-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Request: Add project for comparison and benchmarking #7
Comments
Good idea, but I could not get it to work
Now mount:
Write into mountpoint:
See what shows up in the encrypted dir:
Uhm looks like did not manage to enable encryption? |
I did the tar extract test anyway: 57 seconds. Looking at https://nuetzlich.net/gocryptfs/comparison/#performance , that's about 4 times slower than gocryptfs. |
For rclone, you'd need to make two "remotes". The first would be the actual filesystem where you'd be storing the encrypted files. But you won't configure it as an encrypted store. Then the second rclone remote would be an encrypted remote that references your first remote, where you reference the first remote by its rclone entry name ie: Hope that helps. |
I would also like to see the rclone in the tests... |
any update on this ? |
Sorry but probably I will not do this myself. If somebody benchmarks and posts the numbers i can add them to the page, though. |
Just to clarify: the benchmark is relevant for the 'Performance check mark'? Apart from that, RClone not only supports encryption with a lot providers but it also has an Android app (also on GitHub). Which might be especially relevant for people that were interested in issue 121. Maybe at least the hint |
Regarding: "If you spot an error or want to see a project added, please file a ticket!"
I'd like to request you compare performance with a locally mounted rclone crypt -- where the encrypted path is a local folder, and the decrypted path is also a different local folder.
https://rclone.org/crypt/
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: