Cloud Password Manager, OneLogin Hacked!

[Digerati]

Password manager OneLogin hacked, exposing sensitive customer data

This is why I still don't trust "the cloud" to backup my data, or to secure any of my sensitive data. I don't fear they will lose it, I fear it will be stolen or compromised.

 

[writhziden]

I fear both. I still keep family photos on the cloud as an off-site backup in case something were to happen to my physical media. I also have important documents backed up on the cloud but password protected/encrypted. Most of my sensitive data is backed up on Blu-Ray discs at home (cheapest cost per byte backup medium from what I could find).

 

[Digerati]

I fear both.

I think files saved to cloud storage are safe from getting lost because they not only backup everything, but typically have mirrored servers and even mirrored sites.

Most of my sensitive data is backed up on Blu-Ray discs at home (cheapest cost per byte backup medium from what I could find).

I would think a spare hard drive would be cheaper - and faster too.

 

[writhziden]

I fear both.

I think files saved to cloud storage are safe from getting lost because they not only backup everything, but typically have mirrored servers and even mirrored sites.

Most of my sensitive data is backed up on Blu-Ray discs at home (cheapest cost per byte backup medium from what I could find).

I would think a spare hard drive would be cheaper - and faster too.

Yeah, I imagine it's unlikely that things would be lost, but even a small possibility is a possibility.

Medium costs:

50 Blu-Ray discs for $20 -> 1.1 TB for $20
The cheapest 1 TB drive I found on Amazon was $50.​

Add into that that hard drives fail faster than Blu-Ray media when both are handled with care.

 

[Tekno Venus]

Cloud storage for large files isn't an option for me. I use Google Drive & OneDrive for Uni work because that way I can't lose it and it's always accessible. Programming work lives either on Google Drive/OneDrive or private Git repos. However, our upload speed at home is ~7Mbps. Looking at my backup server, I have 1.5TB on my storage array. Uploading 1.5TB over a 7Mbps upload would take around 20 days to upload. Not to mention the cost of 1.5TB of cloud storage compared to local drives (paid less than £200 for my backup server with 3TB of usable storage (2x3TB disks in a Storage Spaces mirror) Not practical So until internet speeds improve where I live, cloud storage isn't very viable. I guess it's better now though, we had 0.3Mbps upload a few years ago! Wish I could keep my Uni internet though - I get 800Mbps down/900Mbps upload in my room! :O

 

[Digerati]

Well, I can't remember the last time I had a hard drive fail so that is not really a problem for me - especially since I keep multiple backups. And yeah, 1TB drives maybe a $50, but 4TB are $100. Plus, you don't need a Blu-ray drive to use them. You can install them as a secondary drive in a computer, or in an enclosure, or I use a docking station which is great because you just pop them in - no opening up computer or enclosure cases. And the drives are even hot-swappable - also very nice.
But I say, whatever works best for you is the best solution. At least you have a backup plan and you use it - that's what's important! :thumbs_up::beerchug2:

and it's always accessible.

For sure, having an off-site storage location that is accessible from anywhere is a HUGE advantage. People don't think about an off-site copy but it really is important. A fire, flood, or tornado could take out your home, computer, and all backups too. Or a thief could clean out your house and all your backups. So an extra copy at a trusted friend's or relative'ss, or even a bank safe deposit box is a good idea.

And for sure, anything you don't want prying eyes to see in the cloud needs to be encrypted.

 

[writhziden]

And yeah, 1TB drives maybe a $50, but 4TB are $100. Plus, you don't need a Blu-ray drive to use them. You can install them as a secondary drive in a computer, or in an enclosure, or I use a docking station which is great because you just pop them in - no opening up computer or enclosure cases. And the drives are even hot-swappable - also very nice.

I have a portable Blu-Ray burner/player for my systems, so it's about as convenient for me to do it this way as having an external hard drive. I do not like the larger hard drive capacities; it seems like more can go wrong as they get larger with the number of sectors. I had a 2 TB drive start failing on me with bad sectors after less than a year, so my backup data was getting corrupted over time. The other issue I often have with external backup drives is how Windows fills System Volume Information with data over time. I've had to clear up as much as 200-300 GB a few times through Linux.

 

[Digerati]

I don't believe hard drives are failing more often because they have much greater densities (capacities). I think hard drives are failing more often because makers have cut too many corners in quality to shave another penny or two off the cost of production. Sure, more sectors means more chances for sector failures, but that does not explain why entire drives seem to be failing at greater rates.

My belief is based on some pretty solid circumstantial evidence, IMO. Back in 2011, both Seagate and WD cut their standard 5 year warranties down to 3 years and in many cases just 1 year. The "spin" used by the makers to explain these warranty cutbacks is pretty standard PR/marketing hype. But it does not take a savvy consumer to see the real reason - they simply no longer trust their cheaper (quality, not price) drives anymore.

ComputerWorld, December 2011: Hard drive manufacturers slash warranty periods

 

[writhziden]

I don't believe hard drives are failing more often because they have much greater densities (capacities). I think hard drives are failing more often because makers have cut too many corners in quality to shave another penny or two off the cost of production. Sure, more sectors means more chances for sector failures, but that does not explain why entire drives seem to be failing at greater rates.

My belief is based on some pretty solid circumstantial evidence, IMO. Back in 2011, both Seagate and WD cut their standard 5 year warranties down to 3 years and in many cases just 1 year. The "spin" used by the makers to explain these warranty cutbacks is pretty standard PR/marketing hype. But it does not take a savvy consumer to see the real reason - they simply no longer trust their cheaper (quality, not price) drives anymore.

ComputerWorld, December 2011: Hard drive manufacturers slash warranty periods

Yep, I had noticed that, too. It is another reason I have moved away from hard drives as my primary backup storage. I prefer more reliable backups to prevent loss of important data.