Re: [bitfolk] The immutability of backups, revisited

In light of this, one new proposal that I have is that the disk space for backups should be a lot cheaper. BitFolk has an abundance of spare disk space that isn't selling. I don't think I want to reduce the cost of general purpose disk space (it's already quite low), but it seems only fair that disk space for backups -- which is of limited use -- should be cheaper. Hopefully this will encourage larger quotas for backups and make accidental backups a lesser issue, since it will impact you less to just have them cycle off the end.

My next proposal is that it might be an acceptable risk to allow customers, via panel.bitfolk.com, to temporarily grant themselves write access to their backups. I'm suggesting it remains writable for just a few hours and then it automatically goes read-only again. Since that would be logged it would be possible to still be confident about the sanctity of the backups after a compromise.