Backblaze has stopped backing up your data
Backblaze, a long-trusted personal backup service, is accused of silently abandoning its 'unlimited backup' promise by excluding critical folders like Git repositories and cloud sync directories. This exposé has ignited a firestorm among users who feel their trust has been betrayed, highlighting a systemic problem with providers quietly altering service terms. The discussion delves into the pitfalls of opaque backup solutions and the ongoing quest for truly reliable data preservation.
The Lowdown
A long-time Backblaze user discovered that the service had quietly ceased backing up critical data, including .git folders and files within cloud synchronization services like OneDrive and Dropbox. Despite Backblaze's historical marketing as an 'unlimited' backup solution with 'no restrictions on file type or size,' these exclusions were not clearly communicated, leading to widespread user frustration and a sense of betrayal.
- The author, a loyal Backblaze customer for a decade, initially praised the service for its reliability and successful data recovery in the past.
- Trouble began when a
.gitfolder could not be restored, revealing it was silently excluded without a clear option to re-enable it. - Further investigation, prompted by a Reddit thread, showed that OneDrive and Dropbox folders were also being ignored by Backblaze.
- The author strongly argues that cloud sync is not a backup, emphasizing the limited retention policies and potential account bans of sync services, which makes Backblaze's exclusion particularly dangerous.
- Backblaze acknowledged these changes only in obscure release notes, labeling them as 'Improvements' to prevent 'performance issues, excessive data usage, and unintended uploads.'
- The author points out that these exclusions were not updated on Backblaze's public list of file exclusions, adding to the lack of transparency.
This deliberate lack of communication and the silent degradation of service functionality are presented as a profound breach of trust. For the author, Backblaze's failure to back up all data, as promised, renders it effectively useless as a comprehensive backup solution.
The Gossip
Betrayal Backlash
Many commenters echoed the author's sentiment of betrayal and loss of trust, having relied on Backblaze for years for what they believed was a comprehensive 'unlimited' backup. This silent degradation of service is seen as a classic example of 'enshittification,' driving loyal customers away. The core issue is the expectation of a service that backs up everything versus a provider making opaque decisions about what constitutes 'essential' data.
Exclusion Explanation Examination
The technical reasons behind Backblaze's exclusions, particularly for `.git` folders and cloud sync directories, were debated. Some argued that `.git` folders can cause object count bloat and performance issues for backup software, while cloud-synced folders (especially with 'files on demand') might create cyclic updates. However, even those understanding these challenges universally criticized Backblaze's lack of transparent communication and the failure to provide users with options to override these exclusions.
DIY Backup Dreams and Alternatives
A significant portion of the discussion focused on users sharing their more robust, often self-managed, backup strategies. Many advocate for using tools like Restic or Syncthing combined with S3-compatible cloud storage providers (e.g., Wasabi, Hetzner, Backblaze B2) to achieve encrypted, controlled, and cost-effective backups. This approach is favored for providing greater transparency, control over retention policies, and avoiding vendor lock-in compared to 'unlimited' consumer services.
Unlimited Uncertainty
Commenters scrutinized the inherent challenges and potential economic pressures of an 'unlimited' backup service. The consensus was that 'unlimited' often implies that the provider will eventually find ways to manage costs, which can lead to arbitrary changes in service, such as silently excluding data. This 'unlimited' promise creates an expectation that inevitably clashes with business realities, resulting in customer disappointment when those limits are surreptitiously imposed.
Web Woes & Readability
A tangent emerged regarding the accessibility of the author's blog post itself. Several users complained about the low-contrast gray font on a white background, especially on mobile devices. They noted it made the article difficult to read and potentially violated WCAG accessibility guidelines, humorously suggesting it was 'only meant for LLMs to see for training.'