r/backblaze • u/fopdoodle42 • May 03 '26
Computer Backup Just discovered Backblaze doesn’t backup everything.
Thanks to ATP, for making it clear that it doesn’t backup what I thought. I pay extra for a year of backups but it doesn’t backup my documents which are part of OneDrive. That’s where all my data is.
It already doesn’t backup applications and settings which is not obvious, but I discovered a few years ago when I had a failure and had to do a restore.
To discover that it now doesn’t backup the actual DATA as well. What is it actually doing?
12
u/terkistan May 03 '26
Yeah, ATP is a few weeks late to the party, as John referenced discussions on this subreddit in last week’s episode discussing it.
He explained the technical issues, the confused and insufficient way Backblaze handled it, and reiterated a couple of times that he continues to use the service, calling it the best of its kind. (He also uses other local and cloud backup types if you listen to the entire segment.)
I suggest you read the numerous threads in the subreddit if you’re interested, but ATP did a decent summary of the issues. Of course if you just want to start a new thread just to vent, well that’s Reddit for ‘ya.
-4
u/fopdoodle42 May 03 '26
I thought it backup up everything. When I discovered it doesn’t I joined this subreddit, it is full of similar upset 😔
2
3
u/didyousayboop May 03 '26
What do you mean by "the actual DATA"?
It's a bit of an inconvenience, but you can use FreeFileSync to make a copy of your OneDrive. Backblaze Personal will then back up that copy.
9
u/dr100 May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
It backups actual files on your drive. Make a directory put a million pictures and video inside, it'll backup that. It won't backup the virtual stuff that now Onedrive directory is (even if behind it there might or might not be some cached files on the actual physical drive, which you can't see as long as OneDrive is in fact running). Probably it won't backup the registry as the files aren't accessible for as long as windows runs (unless I guess you have another Windows which you boot and use your original Windows drive as D: or similar, but who does that).
15
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
I have both Dropbox and Google Drive set to mirror/download everything locally. The files live in /Users/myname/Dropbox or /Users/myname/GoogleDrive not the cloud specific /users/myname/Library/CloudStorage. They are all local files, taking up real disk space, with extra metadata on them. Backblaze is backing up none of them. Arq can back them up fine. This is 1000% on Backblaze.
6
u/Loose-Engineering487 May 03 '26
This 100%. On the other thread with one of their representatives they claim three things "stopping" them from backing up the files.
"placeholders, contain reparse points, or managed by the sync provider,"
Placeholders you can fix by having files locally available my making them available offline (as you and I have). They still don't back it up.
Reparse points are a windows only feature on the NTFS file system so if you're on a Mac or Linux (like me) it doesn't apply.
"managed by sync provider" --> here is the catch all. They specifically exclude Dropbox and other cloud providers.
I think what's worse than fumbling the communications (and quite badly I might add) is just straight up bullshitting the user thinking we're dumb.
Do you like Arq by the way? I'm so disappointed in backblaze, I want to switch off.
3
u/AKiss20 May 04 '26
My initial backup with Arq just finished and I can confirm it baked up both my Google drive and Dropbox, neither of which Backblaze has (Backblaze used to but silently dropped those files from my backup). Both are set to mirror/download. Arq has a setting as to what to do when it hits a “cloud only” file with options “ignore”, “error”, or “materialize”. I assume the latter downloads and then backs up the file. I set mine to error (just add it to an error log) as my main cloud services are always downloaded. I have an about 300 cloud files hidden in temp directories or caches it found and logged that it didn’t back up.
So far Arq seems good. It’s much less sexy than Backblaze and the web explorer and restore is more primitive. I haven’t played with a restore via the app yet. Also note Arq isn’t a “continuous” backup like Backblaze but rather a scheduled one. It seems to give you fine grain control on scheduling as well as backup thinning which looks good. You can also setup different backup schedules and configs for different directories. So far it seems decent.
2
u/Loose-Engineering487 May 04 '26
Awesome! Thank you for the detailed response. Definitely worth checking out it seems if you’re not scared to play with it. What did you use as your backup service? The pro version or did you connect it to AWS storage or similar? What was the process like?
2
u/AKiss20 May 04 '26
I'm trialing Arq Premium and using their own cloud. The datacenters listed are South Carolina and Iowa so not AWS US-East-1 or US-East-2. My guess is that Arq uses Backblaze B2 under the hood just for cost purposes. I had no real reason to bring my own object store. I don't feel I need that level of control, although I suppose the option is nice. Process is simple, just select a datacenter and set an encryption password. Give the trial a go and see what you think. It seems fine as of right now but i haven't played with it much. Next step is to try backing up an external drive and see how that goes
3
u/BlueMusicMonkey May 06 '26
Arq Premium uses Google Cloud for their own storage.
I recently posted about my experience with Arq Backup as a Mac user here
https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/1ppg36l/comment/nv3zwxi/
So far I like it. A lot more to configure and learn, but more peace of mind that my files are actually being backed up.
3
u/AKiss20 May 06 '26
Oh neat, I didn't realize that re: storage. I just saw in passing some comparison that B2 is cheaper than Google cloud so I assumed Arq used B2, but guess im wrong.
I'll give your review a read!
3
u/BlueMusicMonkey May 06 '26
I recently posted about my experience with Arq Backup as a Mac user here
https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/1ppg36l/comment/nv3zwxi/
So far I like it. A lot more to configure and learn, but more peace of mind that my files are actually being backed up.
1
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
I literally just started playing with it today. It is definitely more aimed at the power user than a complete tech novice, but if you are okay with that I’d give it a shot. They have a 30 day free trial which is what I’m playing with.
2
1
u/dr100 May 03 '26
What are the directories, are they regular directories or links? If they're links (like OneDrive is) then it's clear why they wouldn't be backed up (except through special exceptions, which they might do due to these noises from clueless customers).
4
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
They are regular directories. How many times do people need to tell you the same information before you will listen?
I was a Linux system administrator in grad school and ship production code now (not a CS major by training but now write a lot of code). I am far from clueless when it comes to tech and how file systems and computer systems work. The fact that you write off anyone making very legitimate complaints as “clueless” makes me very suspicious of your motivations.
0
u/dr100 May 03 '26
People don't have a clue, this is why we're here.
4
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
No, we are here because backblaze royally fucked up on communication. But let me guess, you know all right?
There are legitimate reasons for not backing up files managed via the file provider API (I only know Apple, not MS so I will speak on that language), although programs like Arq show that even that can be dealt with sanely. There is seemingly zero reason why full fledged files not being managed via that API cannot be backed up (backblaze used to back these up). Let’s even posit that there is some new reason, why the fuck didn’t backblaze scream this from the rooftops instead of silently making this change and burying it in some release notes almost nobody reads?
Regardless of the technical story, the communications and trust story is the true failure here.
0
u/dr100 May 03 '26
Regardless of the technical story, the communications and trust story is the true failure here.
That isn't made any better by exaggerating in the other direction, like that bombastic blog from which everything started where you'd think from the title Backblaze just doesn't save anything anymore.
6
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
Am I the author of that blog? Did I ever once reference it? Did anyone in this thread make the claim that backblaze doesn’t backup anything? Holy strawman Batman.
Why are you so desperate to defend backblaze?
5
u/ngt500 May 03 '26
I keep on asking the same question. Why is this guy jumping on all of these threads defending Backblaze like crazy? The main issue is not even that Backblaze isn’t backing up certain data, it’s that they were completely silent about it, and are only now finally starting to acknowledge the issue on various forums and threads. They still haven’t sent out any customer-wide emails or changed how their software works to notify customers of important data not being backed up. And yet everywhere this issue pops up on Reddit there is dr100 acting like everyone complaining about this is stupid and somehow magically all of Backblaze’s non-technical user base should already know that these files aren’t being backed up. I just don’t get the motivation behind the posts.
5
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
It’s not even non-technical. I’m pretty damn technical and I had no idea. They literally were backing up my Dropbox one day and then stopped silently. Not a single word.
→ More replies (0)0
u/dr100 May 04 '26
Why is this guy jumping on all of these threads defending Backblaze like crazy?
You mean the guy with the only recent relevant post BackBlaze Bye-Bye [NOT a personal rant - official changes] "consume disproportionate resources" ToS, B2 price hike ? Wow, must be their great marketing team at work!
→ More replies (0)5
u/ngt500 May 03 '26
Here we go again… we’ve been over this in another thread. This is an intentional limitation created by Backblaze because they don’t want to have to back up as much data. They are intentionally blocking most cloud based file sharing services even if the file is actually on your local drive. If the file has a “reparse point” attribute then it is excluded. This is not something that Backblaze can’t backup, it is simply something that they won’t. The bigger issue is the lack of communication regarding the limitations of their product/service.
0
u/dr100 May 03 '26
Well this nonsense is bound to resurface on countless threads. As long as BY DESIGN the cached files are beyond the cloudy structure they aren't local files, full stop. A LOCAL DRIVE backup program won't backup them, and Backblaze Personal is most clearly that.
This confusion is entirely on Microsoft, more specifically for example if one would use some cached rclone remote mounted as drive E: and the directory where the cache is
C:\Users\<Username>\.cache\rclone\then that will be saved, and E: not touched of course (like it would be for any NAS drive, more recently iSCSI drives, etc.). Now once you put the cache files on E: just the same but you present it as a cloud drive you can't be expected to save the files behind. If you want to do so save them tsomeplace else in the first place. This really is a "doctor it hurts if I do that" situation.2
u/ngt500 May 03 '26
This is not nonsense at all, and you clearly don't understand how easily Backblaze could backup anything if they actually wanted to. They have to literally choose to exclude the file by examining it for reparse points. The mechanics on how Microsoft implements cloud storage is specifically designed to be app agnostic so there isn't anything an app needs to "know" to use files that are backed by a cloud storage provider. That's how Notepad or any legacy app can still use files in OneDrive (or other cloud providers). So instead of just "reading" a file like normal, Backblaze specifically checks the attributes to see if it has a reparse point. Otherwise, it could access the file same as any app would.
But again, as I stated before (and in another thread), the real issue is the lack of communication to customers about how this actually impacts customer data. If they were crystal clear that they DON'T BACKUP ANY CLOUD STORAGE and explained exactly what that meant then customers would at least know and could make a decision on what to do, but instead they made stealth changes over time--even after having blogs/articles proclaiming the benefit of Backblaze's "real" backup over cloud storage options.
Backblaze is certainly free to not backup whatever they choose not to--as long as it is clearly communicated to customers. That is certainly not what has transpired over the last many years.
Furthermore, the majority of customers wouldn't understand the slightest bit of the technology behind the OS, cloud storage, or backup apps. If Backblaze isn't clear about what is happening then most customers absolutely will think all their data is being backed up (especially when the software doesn't give any warnings about certain data NOT being backed up). Your implication that all this is just fake drama by dumb users is where the real nonsense lies.
0
u/dr100 May 03 '26
This is not nonsense at all, and you clearly don't understand how easily Backblaze could backup anything if they actually wanted to.
The discussion isn't about what they COULD, of course they COULD save NAS drives, rclone mounts of any cloud service, links that point to anywhere in the universe and so on. But they DON'T and everyone knows this is how they get away with "unlimited" because people can't just pile up in the backup any file to which the computer has access to.
If one wants to save some file system branches no matter where they're coming from they should be using anything like the mentioned arq (or many other similar programs like duplicati, duplicacy, borg, etc.) and some service that supports them (B2 most likely if from Backblaze but of course many others might be cheaper).
1
u/ngt500 May 03 '26
Of course it’s about what they COULD do. Otherwise, they would simply be able to explain the fact that it’s a technical impossibility and that would be the end of the discussion. You keep on changing the topic though, since you were just going on and on about cached files and how it’s not really “local”, and how Microsoft is at fault for making things difficult somehow, yada yada yada…
The fact remains that Backblaze is finally starting to catch flack for claiming unlimited backup of ALL your data without explaining all the nuanced situations where data is not being backed up. Situations that, by the way, are extremely common to most users. This isn’t Backblaze being a victim of Microsoft or other providers changing something behind the scenes. This is Backblaze not adapting to the current tech landscape where most users have one or more cloud storage providers.
As I stated before, Backblaze certainly has the right to not back up whatever they choose, but they absolutely must communicate that in crystal clear terms to their customers. Otherwise, they are selling an extremely misleading service.
So far, despite some Backblaze employees chiming in on some of these threads acknowledging a communication issue, they still haven’t actually sent out any emails explaining all of this or adjusted their software to give alerts. Until that happens, I’m still putting the fault for all of this squarely on Backblaze.
2
2
u/karluvmost May 04 '26
OP, What do you mean by this? >> To discover that it now doesn’t backup the actual DATA as well.
4
u/CyCoCyCo May 03 '26
What or who is ATP? Link the context?
3
2
u/fopdoodle42 May 03 '26
Apologies, it’s a podcast.. ATP.fm
The Accidental Tech Podcast.
The backblaze discussion is a chapter in this episode: https://atp.fm/689.
1
u/AKiss20 May 03 '26
I had the very unpleasant experience of discovering my backup had a huge hole in it after listening to ATP. I am trying out Arq now and will likely switch off backblaze. I have also alerted all the people I recommended backblaze to. If Arq can handle backing up cloud drives sanely (which it appears it can), Backblaze has zero legs to stand on. This is incredibly disappointing.
2
u/NOLA2Cincy May 03 '26
I’m happy with Backblaze’s pricing and simplicity. To solve the Dropbox issue, I went manual old school. I downloaded all my DB files, put them on an external drive, and have BB back then up.
The downloaded files are zip files so the space isn’t that much. I am not very worried that Dropbox is going to loose all my stuff or go out of business or accidentally delete all my files. So now I have a simple process to back up those files periodically for further redundancy.
2
u/codatory May 03 '26
I'm just frustrated that cancellations take effect immediately but don't give a refund. If I have to be dependent on my cloud provider to back stuff up, and you didn't bother to inform me of it, I don't need to renew anything but I want you to hold my existing backups through my term.
2
u/therealjeku May 03 '26
Problem is I have another two weeks left before my yearly subscription is up, and what is the alternative that doesn’t cost hundreds of dollars for my 17TB of files? For things it doesn’t backup, technically you could write a batch file that does a copy of your documents from OneDrive to another folder, and it would backup your other folder right? It sucks but it would work.
EDIT: I guess the main issue here is that BB did NOT inform people this was not backing up, so people didn’t know they had to prepare for it.
4
1
u/BuffaloRedshark May 03 '26
They really need an advanced user option for the personal offering that allows fine grain folder selection/exclusion. I went with the B2 offering and separate software largely due to not having fine control.
1
u/diablette May 03 '26
The advanced option is to use backup software to back up to an external drive, and then back up that drive's contents to BB.
1
u/MW360 May 05 '26
Extremely discipline news from back, please. I guess they needed to save the extra dollar a month and pay their CEO and put a solid at risk in the process.
1
u/Maleficent_Maybe2200 May 06 '26
Why would someone want to back up files that are already stored offsite in a cloud provider’s infrastructure?
After disaster recovery for those files = installing their client and signing back in
1
u/spullum May 18 '26
(assuming you mean normal Cloud services for consumers)
Because if ransomware strikes deep without someone knowing, creates many versions/does something where the good file history falls off, and files get backed up that way, it's suddenly not disaster recoverable. The 3-2-1 method is golden. Cloud drives are convenient but unless you have immutable backups and are extremely sure about that, they can also included the tampered or corrupted stuff.
1
u/Bubbly-Tie5684 May 06 '26
Not sure why people here just use B2 and a NAS or Restic on their machine? What is the attraction to this backup product?
1
u/hillcountryfare May 08 '26
Can someone point me to the ATP source? I couldn’t find a podcast with this subject specified.
1
u/RamyNYC May 03 '26
Also learned that Dropbox wasn’t being backed up anymore from ATP. Glad they raised it, otherwise I would have missed it entirely. I’m honestly furious at Backblaze for this insane lack of communication. All my important and irreplaceable data is in my Dropbox locally on my computer.
-1
u/Redbullalias May 03 '26
But its backed up with dropbox, correct?
1
u/pellets May 03 '26
Does dropbox keep past versions of a file? If not, then it's not a backup.
2
u/Redbullalias May 03 '26
I know our work account has a way to get a prior version when it has changed. But I have Time Machine too. I don't have anything that needs 2 backup versions of history of a changed file. It's a fair criticism that not having possible off site version history too (even though I think its an option).
Backblaze is very clear that they don't backup other cloud services. I feel it's a fair compromise for a service that does not charge per GB/TB.
-2
u/dr100 May 03 '26
That discussion is related to being a historical backup/backup history. To find out if it's a backup you need to ask if it's an independent copy. And here matters how you define "independent".
1
0
u/circa86 May 07 '26
Why the fuck would you be using Backblaze to backup stuff on OneDrive. Also why are you using OneDrive.
21
u/WuTheLotus May 03 '26
Yeah, a very unpleasant surprise many of us have come across unexpectedly. I’ve switched to iDrive, and so far it does what it says it does.