Asklemmy

43912 readers

1036 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What is the best FOSS file sharing protocol/app? (preferably CLI) (monyet.cc)

submitted 10 months ago by KDE@monyet.cc to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello fellow lemmy users ,

i was wondering whats the best file sharing protocol/app/website , tbh send.vis.ee seems to be currently the best to me but still i wanted your opinion here are things i found

Localsend
ffsend
croc
webtorrent
magic-wormhole
using curl on 0x0.st or pixeldrain
(anonfiles has left so thats sad)
rsync / ssh
onionshare
ipfs

#from what i am hearing , magic-wormhole makes the most sense since they seem to be the most open standard of sharing files but still seems incomplete or the lack of information on such topic makes me feels wierd.

croc seems to have a lot of cve and magic wormhole passed that test from suse's audit. webtorrent seems to fit in a wierd niche and its implementations like file.pizza arent really that well built ( considering you cant send multi files over there)

i would prefer cli but gui's as well so that i can send it to somebody else , i would like foss protocol since we can build on that other apps as well , and earlier i used to use shareit which was so bad that literally the govt pulled it because of chinese concerns
currently using localsend but warp (magic-wormhole)/warpinator is also looking good

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

No search engine is going to find a long obfuscated URL. I don't think NC publishes a site tree for a crawler to use.

In fact, unless you post your domain somewhere online or its registration is available somewhere, it's unlikely anyone will ever visit your server without a direct link provided by you or someone else who knows it.

You might still get discovered by IP crawlers, but even then they aren't going to be trial and erroring their way to shared files, for the same reason they can't brute force any sane SSH password.

[–] Perhyte@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In fact, unless you post your domain somewhere online or its registration is available somewhere, it’s unlikely anyone will ever visit your server without a direct link provided by you or someone else who knows it.

If you use HTTPS with a publicly-trusted certificate (such as via Let's Encrypt), the host names in the certificate will be published in certificate transparency logs. So at least the "main" domain will be known, as well as any subdomains you don't hide by using wildcards.

I'm not sure whether anyone uses those as a list of sites to automatically visit, but I certainly would not count on nobody doing so.

That just gives them the domain name though, so URLS with long randomly-generated paths should still be safe.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

There is also the DNS system itself, not sure if reverse lookup is possible in some way without a PTR record, but suffice to say there are ways, and there are many.

Obscurity is not security, just a reasonable first line of defense. If you run something publicly accessible, lock it down.

Stuff that can't be brute forced in a million years is a good way to do that, even if it's just a string in a URL. It's basically like having to enter a password. You could even fail2ban it by banning IPs that try a bunch of random URLs that aren't valid, or use a simple rate-limit.

[–] nixcamic@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nah I have some services running on unpublished domains and I get hit by brute force attempts at SSH logins all the time. It might not be sane but botnet gonna botnet.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago

Oh, same. Though on my current IP it hasn't happened for a couple years, now.

But finding an SSH port with an IP crawler is a lot easier than finding all the services accessible behind different paths/subdomains on port 80. And even then, mapping out a site-tree all the way out to uncrackable-password-lenght URLs, is never gonna happen by brute force.