Traditional backup tools can mostly be subdivided by the following characteristics:

• file-based vs. image-based
  Image-based solutions make sure everything is backed up, but are potentially difficult to restore on other (less powerful) hardware. Additionally, creating images by using traditional tools like dd requires the disk that is being backed up to be unmounted (to avoid consistency issues). This makes image-based backups better suited for filesystems that allow doing advanced operations like snapshots or zfs send-style images that contain a consistent snapshot of the data of interest. For file-based tools there is also a distinction between tools that exactly replicate the source file structure in the backup target (e.g. rsync or rdiff-backup) and tools that use an archive format to store backup contents (tar).

• networked vs. single-host
  Networked solutions allow backing up multiple hosts and to some extent allow for centralized administration. Traditionally, a dedicated client is required to be installed on all machines to be backed up. Networked solutions can act pull-based (server gets backups from the clients) or push-based (client sends backup to server). Single-Host solutions consist of a single tool that is being invoked to backup data from the current host to a target storage. As this target storage can be a network target, the distinction between networked and single-host solutions is not exactly clear.

• incremental vs. full
  Traditionally, tools either do an actual 1:1 copy (full backup) or copy “just the differences“ which can mean anything from “copy all changed files” to “copy changes from within files”. Incremental schemes allow multiple backup states to be kept without needing much disk space. However, traditional tools require that another full backup be made in order to free space used by previous changes.

Modern tools mostly advance things on the incremental vs. full front by acting incremental forever without the negative impacts that such a scheme has when realized with traditional tools. Additionally, modern tools mostly rely on their own/custom archival format. While this may seem like a step back from tools that replicate the file structure, there are numerous potential advantages to be taken from this:

This repo aims to compare different backup solutions among:

borg backup
bupstash
restic
kopia
duplicacy
your tool (PRs to support new backup tools are welcome)
The idea is to have a script that executes all backup programs on the same datasets.

Congratulations!

You are about to get married and begin the adventure of a lifetime!

Together, you are deciding which Method of Natural Family Planning (NFP) or Fertility Awareness Method (FAM) best suits your values, lifestyle, and gives you the confidence you are looking for in avoiding pregnancy (and for achieving pregnancy when you’re ready).

Finding the right method is key for becoming confident in practicing NFP and enjoying everything this lifestyle has to offer you as a couple.

At Natural Womanhood we have supported thousands of couples in this journey. We understand your questions and needs, and we want to make this important decision easier for you.

Modern Authentication is an umbrella term originally defined by Microsoft, but many other companies also use it to describe a set of the following:

• Authentication methods (authentication = how something/somebody logs in to a system)
• Authorization methods (authorization = mechanisms that make sure you do not have full access to something by default)
• Conditional access policies (policies which define the conditions under which certain additional steps have to be taken in order to log into a system)

Authorization and authentication methods are standardized in the digital world. The industry standard for authorization is OAuth2. For authentication there is no industry standard, but the standard which is most widely used is OpenID Connect. Although they serve different purposes, these standards are very much related from a technology standpoint. The OpenID Connect protocol suite extends the OAuth protocol and they are based on the same technologies. OAuth was never designed to authenticate users or persons, but only services. That is why OpenID Connect was created.

How would Modern Authentication look like in our airport analogy? With Modern Authentication, the procedure seems quite familiar: You fly abroad, leave the plane and go to the security officer at the border control. The officer asks to see your passport on which he can find all the important information needed to identify who you are and where you are from. This information is protected by anti-forgery mechanisms. In the digital word, the passport is what we call an ID token. This token contains important information: who you are, who created the token, how long it is valid, etc.
Where Does Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) Fit Into the Mold?

Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) and Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) are a part of the authentication process. The process is as follows: You as a user connect to your identity provider who needs to validate that it is really you trying to connect. Depending on the conditional access policies which are defined by the administrator, your identity provider might ask you for further information. If he believes that just entering your credentials is not enough to authenticate you, for example when you are connecting from an unknown network, he may ask you for additional information, for instance a code which is sent to your mobile phone. Microsoft has implemented this in a very dynamic way. Their systems continuously learn and decide what is a secure system and what is not.