Backblaze has stopped backing up your data
39 points by rrreese 2 hours ago | 13 comments

fuckinpuppers 16 minutes ago
I noticed this (thankfully before it was critical) and I’ve decided to move on from BB. Easily over 10 year customer. Totally bogus. Not only did it stop backing it up the old history is totally gone as well.

The one thing they have to do is backup everything and when you see it in their console you can rest assured they are going to continue to back it up.

They’ve let the desktop client linger, it’s difficult to add meaningful exceptions. It’s obvious they want everyone to use B2 now.

reply
benguild 32 minutes ago
The fact that they’d exclude “.git” and other things without being transparent about it is scandalous
reply
dathinab 18 minutes ago
Ironically drop box and one drive folders I can still somewhat understand as they are "backuped" in other ways (but potentially not reliable so I also understand why people do not like that).

But .git? It does not mean you have it synced to GitHub or anything reliable?

If you do anything then only backup the .git folder and not the checkout.

But backing up the checkout and not the .git folder is crazy.

reply
patates 28 minutes ago
I think this should not be attributed to malice, however unfortunate. I had also developed some sync app once and onedrive folders were indeed problematic, causing cyclic updates on access and random metadata changes for no explicit reason.

Complete lack of communication (outside of release notes, which nobody really reads, as the article too states) is incompetence and indeed worrying.

Just show a red status bar that says "these folders will not be backed up anymore", why not?

reply
100ms 11 minutes ago
Managing backup exclusions strikes again. It's impossible. Either commit to backing up the full disk, including the 80% of easily regenerated/redownloaded etc. data, or risk the 0.001% critical 16 byte file that turns out to contain your Bitcoin wallet key or god knows what else. I've been bitten by this more times than I'd like to admit managing my own backups, it's hard to expect a shrink-wrapped provider to do much better. It only takes one dumb simplification like "my Downloads folder is junk, no need to back that up" combined with (no doubt, years later) downloading say a 1Password recovery PDF that you lazily decide will live in that folder, and the stage is set.

Pinning this squarely on user error. Backblaze could clearly have done better, but it's such a well known failure mode that it's not much far off refusing to test restores of a bunch of tapes left in the sun for a decade.

reply
mr_mitm 6 minutes ago
If there is a footgun I haven't considered yet in backup exclusions, I'd like to know more. Shouldn't it be safe to exclude $XDG_CACHE_HOME? Unfortunately, since many applications don't bother with the XDG standard, I have to exclude a few more directories, so if you have any stories about unexpected exclusions, would you mind sharing?
reply
netdevphoenix 27 minutes ago
I only use Backblaze as a cold storage service so this doesn't affect me but it's worth knowing about changes in the delivery of their other services as it might become widespread
reply
Terr_ 48 minutes ago
I feel that's a systemic problem with all consumer online-backup software: They other use the barest excuse to not back things up. At best, it's to optimize local resources for the average user, and at worst it's to quietly renege on the "unlimited" capacity they promised when they took your money. [1]

Trying to audit—let alone change—the finer details is a pain even for power users, and there's a non-zero risk the GUI is simply lying to everybody while undocumented rules override what you specified.

When I finally switched my main boot to Linux, I found many of those offerings didn't support it, so I wrote some systemd services around Restic + Backblaze B2. It's been a real breath of fresh air: I can tell what's going on, I can set my own snapshot retention rules, and it's an order of magnitude cheaper. [2]

____

[1] Along the lines of "We have your My Documents. Oh, you didn't manually add My Videos? That's your fault." Or in some cases, video file extensions are on the ignore list by default for no discernible reason.

[2] Currently a dollar or two a month for ~200gb. Anything that could be redownloaded from Steam is not included, and years of family videos are elsewhere in the care of other relatives.

reply
rrreese 40 minutes ago
Yes, you're exactly right. Once they decide not to exclude certain filetypes it puts the burden on the endusers who are unequipped to monitor these changes.
reply
aitchnyu 30 minutes ago
Umm, why didnt you find a GUI manager like Vorta (this one is Borg exclusive IIRC)?
reply
Terr_ 22 minutes ago
With restic I don't need some kind of special server daemon on the other end, I can point my backup destination to an arbitrary filesystem or a "dumb" store like S3 or B2.

As for GUIs in general... Well, like I said, I just finished several years of bad experiences with some proprietary ones, and I wanted to see and choose what was really being configured

At this point, I don't think I'd ever want a GUI beyond a basic progress-reporting widget. It's not like I need to regularly micromanage the backup set, especially when nobody else is going to change it under me.

reply
trvz 18 minutes ago
Meanwhile, Backblaze still happily backups up the 100TB+ I have on various hard drives with my Mac Pro.
reply
o10449366 35 minutes ago
I've recently been looking for online backup providers and Backblaze came highly recommended to me - but I think after reading this article I'll look elsewhere because this kind of behavior seems like the first step on the path of enshittification.
reply