Data Encryprion on tardigate

Is it posible to not encrypt data at all?

If i want to make some web video storage like Youtube.
Then i need Use Gateway and then make video accesible thow this gateway to web.
This mean than my Gateway server will donload video from Node network decrypt it and show to user.
But if there will be 1000 diferrent ussers whatching different videos, i need on fly decrypt 1000 videos.
Imagen what CPU i need to this? If I not encrypt them, then no need CPU make so hard work.
If video in public accsess why need encryption at all. Even if each file is 29 parts devided?

Im pretty sure all files to youtube are uploaded though an encryption key though your account, Once you have access to said videos on the internet your not decryptioning them per file if you tested video streaming on tardigate it doesnt take alot of cpu power to watch videos you already uploaded.

Everything should be encrypted these days you dont want someone to know exactly what your uploading when your upload it.

The way to go is upload the file and share the encryption key with everyone that should download it. You don’t need a gateway for that. You can share the encryption key with uplink or basically any other tool that supports our access keys. We are using child keys per file. You can share the key of a specific file, folder or a bucket. It is up to you how much you want to share.

but if you need backup for 200GB on qnap, qnap CPU will blowup encrypting it all.

It wouldnt encrypt all the files at once only when your uploading it.

Yae and if you upload oll of them it take forever.

It would still only process one file at a time though. Less your forcing it to upload everything at once but thats not only going to clogg your cpu power but also your internet.

Encryption is very fast nowadays. I can easily transfer files to my NAS over SFTP at gigabit speeds with relatively low CPU usage. A 1080p YouTube stream is only around 8mbps. Don’t forget YouTube is currently already encrypting videos, it’s HTTPS.

Ideally, the web client would pull the file directly from the Storj network instead of the server ‘proxying’ the data, but I’m not sure if that’s a realistic expectation.

1 Like

I don’t really see why not. You’d have to implement an uplink in JavaScript to run it in the browser. Create an access string with read only access to be used in the browser and it should work. Centralizing a proxy server would get rid of a lot of the advantages of the STORJ network by creating a bottleneck and single point of failure.