this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
173 points (97.8% liked)

Selfhosted

40676 readers
603 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What are you using as a Google photos alternative? Currently I'm using Nextcloud but I'm thinking of switching to a more dedicated solution.

I mainly need to upload photos from my device automatically, have an UI to see and classify them, albuns and sharing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 33 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Chobbes 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’m kind of disappointed by the lack of encryption. It sounds great, but I don’t want to trust the server.

[–] WhyAUsername_1 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Where do you want the encryption? Data at rest? Or data in transit? Also, you have to host your own server. Would you not have trust on your own server ?

[–] Chobbes 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I want all data to be encrypted before it even reaches the server. Yes, I don’t want to trust even my own server for my image backups :), particularly since I would want to use something like Immich to provide photo backups for friends and family and I don’t even want to technically have access to their unencrypted photos unless they explicitly share them. I kind of want the attack surface for my photos to be as small as practical too. It’s almost certainly worse to have them available on my device unencrypted than a dedicated server, but it’s worse to have them unencrypted on both (and I want photos available on device so, thems the breaks).

I get that a lot of people won’t care about this and that they’d rather be able to run the image recognition features of Immich on the server and stuff, but I don’t think it’s entirely unreasonable to want encryption for this. If nothing else I’d love to be able to back up photos for friends and family and legitimately be able to tell them that it’s encrypted and I can’t see any of it. It’d be even sweeter if they could do image recognition on device and sync that metadata (encrypted) to the server as well.

[–] WhyAUsername_1 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Oh I get your point. Coming from family and friends POV, I agree that the server administrator should not be able to open the photos.

[–] Chobbes 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, that’s my main concern. I believe the Immich developers have said they have no desire to implement it, though… Which is fair enough, it doesn’t work for my desired use case though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

I mean, you could still tell them their photos are encrypted 😉😉

(JK I wouldn't)