Look like the latest version of Mac OS X (El Capitan) broke Boxcryptor since application launch correctly but never mount volume correctly.
Any plan to fix soon ?
Look like the latest version of Mac OS X (El Capitan) broke Boxcryptor since application launch correctly but never mount volume correctly.
Any plan to fix soon ?
I'm sorry, but we will not add support for Mac OS X 10.11 (El Capitan) in Boxcryptor Classic. Please upgrade to Boxcryptor if you also want to upgrade to El Capitan.
Thanks for your reply. I would like to know :
1. I don't want to create an account on your web site does the boxcryptor works with encrypted filename in this case (look like it is local mode on the new version) ?
2. I have several volume on BC classic with different password and location, does it possible with boxcryptor ?
3. How to transfert volume from BC Classic to boxcryptor (just copy /move)?
4. BC Classic offer support of encrypted volume on removable drive (by placing and reference volume for this place). Does this is possible with boxcryptor ?
5. Why do you stop support of BC Classic ?
Regarding your questions:
1. You can use Boxcryptor with a local account - in this case, all data is stored in a key file on your computer and no connection to our servers is required. And yes, a local account can also be upgraded to Unlimited Personal or Business in order to use filename encryption.
2. You can only have one Boxcryptor drive and being logged in with one account at a time. Within the Boxcryptor drive you can define various different locations (what would be multiple volumes in BC Classic).
3. Easiest way would be to have both applications running and simply copy the files from the Boxcryptor Classic drive to the Boxcryptor drive.
4. Boxcryptor auto-detects removable drives and automatically adds them as a location in the Boxcryptor drive.
5. Boxcryptor Classic has simply reached it's "end of life". With the release of Boxcryptor 2.0 ~2 years ago, we decided to focus our efforts on Boxcryptor 2.0 and keep our 1.x versions available as Boxcryptor Classic. We also announced that we would support Boxcryptor Classic to keep it up and running but we would not add any new features (like support for new operating systems).
Thanks for your quick reply !
1. I have test the chrome extension with a local account and try to used it from my Dropbox. Detection have been done properly but I can't connect with my local account (Each time I get message: Access Forbiden - Try Again). I'm presume that the Chrome extension works only in "Server Mode". I can't used your server mode for security reason and it is important for me to can access from browser (that I can do with BC Classic today without any problems).
2. Could you please confirm that there is only ONE password for all encrypted information. On BC Classic, we can have a different account for each volume, witch is very convenient and can increase security (but not having same password for all).
3. Does the Android / iOS can browse a Dropbox or does the limitation that apply in my point 1 is the same ?
4. If I add a user (who have a registered server account) to a local account crypted file and send the file and FolderKey.bch to this user could he can decrypt file ?
5. I'm using PathFinder (with is a great replacement for the Finder). Do you plan to present the content of the Finder menu as service so it can be used without having to go to Finder for the BC operations ?
Having find response to :1 and 3, so only need answer for 2 and 5 please.
I'm really hope that I can have different password question 2, so ...???
Regarding your open questions:
2) One local account only has one key file and one password. If you need to use different passwords, you'd have to create multiple local accounts and use multiple key files - which could become messy and confusing so I would recommend against using multiple accounts.
4) Managing permissions (e.g. granting another user access to an encrypted file) is not possible with a local account because of the missing automatic public key distribution (and manual distribution is not an option due to the horrible user experience for the average user).
5) Please see this thread for information how to have the Boxcryptor services in PathFinder:
Thanks for the reply.
I hope that you will consider on future to can manage different passwords. On business this can be very important to have a global share with all documents and special parts accessible only to specific user ... this without having to used your "centralized password" system.
Hi Robert - I think it is very sad that you don't support the classic version on el Capitan. I don't like to encrypt the whole dropbox so how can I encrypt only a certain folder in dropbox?
you don't need to encrypt your whole DropBox with Boxcryptor.
It's possible to select certain folders for encryption.
Please have a look at this short scenario:
1. Set DropBox as a Boxcryptor Location (automatically set when DropBox is installed)
2. Open your Boxcryptor Drive
3. Navigate to the folder you want to encrypt (in the Boxcryptor Drive)
4. Right-click the folder and select the option to encrypt the folder
This way you only encrypt one certain folder with all its contents.
Hello Boxcryptor Team,
That's very sad news you will no longer support Boxcryptor Classic in El Capitan. It is even worse information for myself - I have more than 200GB in a cloud encrypted with Boxcryptor Classic. But there is also bright side - you made me investigate how EncFS is supported by OS X and it seems it's not so bad! You just need MacPorts :)
Bye, bye Boxcryptor Classic
Has anyone found a workaround?
@pawel1611, have you figured out how to get EncFS working? I've had no luck with homebrew.
In any case, I refuse to rent this software. Hell, I'd buy an update if one was provided.... but no subscription model. Sorry.
Hi Boxcryptor Team,
Bad news indeed.. I just recently purchased Boxcryptor Classic because it's this version which does exactly what I need - not the "new" Boxcryptor.
Now, besides losing this investment, I also need your "evacuation" advice on how to move away from Boxcryptor. I'm now on El Capitan, having 2 Gb of encrypted data with encrypted passwords. I need one-time possibility to decrypt my data before I remove Boxcryptor from my Mac for better.
Thank you ahead for the advice..
I just found myself with 3TB of map data an other stuff inaccessible since my upgrade. This is going to be a painful fallback to get access to that data. Not to mention, I paid for the encrypted file names and multiple devices which is now an annual fee? Could anyone recommend an alternate program that will not have these issues? Even worse...my entire financial records are encrypted and not accessible now. I bought this for the individual file encryption due to a container becoming corrupt and losing all those files. Since then, I have multiple backups, but things do become corrupt.
It looks like between 1.3.4 and 1.4.anything up had something change which prevents it from working on El Capitan. 1.3.4 is not supposed to work on yosemite or later, but it works fine for me. Follow this exactly:
1) download 1.3.4
2) make sure no other boxcryptor dmg is mounted...this causes issues.
3) delete your current boxcyrptor file...do not uninstall it...just delete the single file.
4) install 1.3.4
5) run 1.3.4...everything should be working fine now. If not, check to see the version number of your boxcryptor...I found mine would retain if I had multiple dmg's mounted or I had not deleted the newer boxcryptor version.
To think about:
We will be rolling back from all the fixes, but this at least works. I wish Boxcryptor would simply fix the one thing changed that breaks in in El Capitan.
@Trebuin - your workaround worked for me, thanks - but only after I had installed the latest version of OS X Fuse as well... It even seems to have picked up my license so it still encrypts the file names.
SO - yeah, better than nothing. We should just keep in mind that we are left with a quite obsolete app relying on a non-native file system ( I can recall at least one serious data crash with one of those earlier versions of FUSE-based Boxcryptor). So one cannot really trust important info to Boxcryptor Classic anymore. BTW, encrypted Mac OS X Sparse Bundle Disk Images can offer a surprisingly elegant, free, and reliable alternative in you only need to access it from Macs.
@samuray7 - The downside of the image is the lack of individual file encryption which I rely upon. I tried Viivo as an alternate and it did not meet my needs, it requires twice the disk space as it does not mount but rather create a file directory that you copy the files to.
It may be possible to import the boxcryptor fuse to get things working, but that may take someone more experienced than me. I've yet to figure out what specifically is causing boxcryptor to fail.
@everyone - Full Fix, no hacks required, just your own work:
After looking at the guts, I took a guess to fix it and figured it out...very simple if boxcryptor wants to update a current version.
1) install the latest version of boxcryptor classic (1.5.409 at the time of this guide) if not already installed
2) open the applications folder in finder view or wherever boxcryptor classic is installed.
3) right click boxcryptor classic and select show package contents
4) expand into Contents, MacOS, Filesystems
5) right click on bccfs.fs and select show package contents
6) expand into Contents, Extensions.
7) copy the 10.10 shortcut and paste it into the same folder...it defaults to the contents folder for me, just drag it back.
8) rename 10.10 copy to 10.11
9) close the window
10) open the applications folder in finder view or wherever boxcryptor classic is installed.
11) right click boxcryptor classic and select show package contents
12) expand into Contents, MacOS, Resources
13) right click on bccfs.fs and select show package contents
14) expand into Contents, Extensions.
15) copy the 10.10 shortcut and paste it into the same folder...it defaults to the contents folder for me, just drag it back.
16) rename 10.10 copy to 10.11
17) close the window
That's all you need to do.
@everyone: I have received notice that an upgrade has been released that is read only...if you want to continue using boxcryptor classic, don't use that version. Version 1.5.409 works fine. the archived versions are located here: https://boxcryptor.desk.com/customer/portal/articles/645466-boxcryptor-classic-for-mac-os-x-changelog
Great instruction, works like a charm again.
Timing couldn't be better too as i just ran into this and just answered it :-)
Indeed, quit annoying because once you upgrade to el capitan the data is gone and it will require going back a version to get the data back (or another pc). I prefer copy pasting a few fs-links
Thank you Trebuin - works well.
I am, however, moving from BoxCryptor now. The new version doesn't allow me to mount and dismount drives and that's been fundamental to my workflow. I handle extremely sensitive data and only ever have one client's data mounted at any point - simple but effective way of preventing leaks/accidental breaches. The new model of a single mount point stinks. Don't want it.
Having seen the 'just drop' attitude from the company, it also gives me absolutely no confidence that they won't do the same again. Support merely confirmed my worst fears about the new version - it doesn't work in the same way, and won't support my workflow. With no support for anything like this in the future, I guess I'm also going to have to look elsewhere.
I'd happily pay for an upgrade to the existing product as it does exactly what I need it to do (I paid for this, and it won't work and there's no migration path for similar functionality - great job BoxCryptor).
So - alternatives folks: for a single encrypted mount-point I use Viivo and/or Truecrypt (now Ciphershed.org - free and works exceptionally well, also going through public security audit processes). So - if we have to move from BoxCryptor - what else does what classic does? Suggestions anyone?
Thanks Trebuin, that was very helpful. I will do it like mikehawkes and move to something else. Sorry Boxcryptor, but I don't like the annual fee, it is much to high for private use. And the free version is a joke to people with more than two devices.
We have just released an updated version of Boxcryptor Classic for Mac OS X which allows basic read-only access on OS X 10.11 El Capitan so that encrypted files can be accessed also on Apple's new operating system version. You can download it here:
If you already upgraded to El Capitan, you can use this version to decrypt your files and either make the switch to Boxcryptor 2.x or to another encryption solution which fits your requirements. If you consider upgrading to Boxcryptor 2.x, existing Boxcryptor Classic customers benefit from a 50% discount on their first year by entering their Boxcryptor Classic serial number at https://www.boxcryptor.com/app/upgrade
I'm sorry that we had to discontinue Boxcryptor Classic but we do not see a technical or economical basis to support further development of Boxcryptor Classic.
First, compatibility with EncFS is a main feature of Boxcryptor Classic - but this compatibility implies technical restrictions (e.g. no individual file keys, no permission management, difficult collaboration, etc.) which prevents us from implementing innovations which are necessary to provide the best encryption solution for cloud storage. This means any further development work would be restricted to keep the functional status quo - and I think I don't need to explain that this makes it impossible to provide a competitive product which can keep the company alive in the long-run.
Second, supporting a new operating system version implies significant costs: changes in the virtual filesystem, redesigning the user interface, quality assurance and much more. And supporting OS X 10.11 El Capitan would only be the beginning: Microsoft recently released Windows 10, iOS 9 was also just released, the Android app would have to be adapted to Material Design, the Windows RT app would need to be completely rewritten as a Universal App etc. etc. At the same time we do not see the chances to refinance these costs with Boxcryptor Classic - and no, not even by charging for an upgrade. Combined with the technical restrictions, we cannot offer support for newer operating systems due to business reasons.
We have decided to switch to a subscription based business model with Boxcryptor 2.x in order to put the company on a sound economic basis. Only this allows us to provide a sustainable development and offer the best value to our users in the long term. It doesn't benefit anybody if we would provide a good and cheap product which could not refinance the company. It would kill the company sooner or later and development would be halted completely. A one-time fee also does not reflect the realities of software development nowadays: software is embedded in an ever-changing environment - new operating system versions like El Capitan, new design mantras like Material Design, new devices like smart watches etc. This means that software continuously has to be adapted in order to provide the best value possible - or sometimes to even work at all. We think a subscription based model best reflects this reality and is the most honest one - instead of releeasing 2014, 2015, etc. versions and charge for every upgrade. Every user knows upfront which costs to expect when purchasing an Unlimited license and can decide if Boxcryptor provides enough value for it - nobody is forced to subscribe if it doesn't.
Our whole team is working on Boxcryptor daily - supporting new operating systems (Win 10, OS X 10.11, iOS 9, Windows Phone 10, etc.), improving the usability and performance, fixing bugs and adding new features (e.g. support for new cloud storage providers).
So I have to agree with everyone's posts above; given that the only thing needed to support Boxcryptor Classic in 10.11 is a symlink, I think it is BS that they are using this to force people to a different product. It would be one thing is Apple switched the FS layer, but they did not, so there is no technical reason not to support it.
I understand the proposed advantages to Boxcryptor, but I use Boxcryptor Classic precisely since it has encFS support. As such, it's the only package I've found that lets me sync encrypted stuff between Mac, Windows and Linux easily.
Anyway, since they refuse to support it, an even easier way to have full support in El Capitain is:
1. Download an older version of Boxcryptor Classic. I used 1.5.409.246 (https://www.boxcryptor.com/download/Boxcryptor_Classic_v1.5.409.246_Installer.dmg).
2. Install the application and open it once (you need to open it before modifying so Gatekeeper doesn't compain to you).
3. Close out Boxcryptor Classic
4. Open Terminal.
5. Run the following command: ln -s /Applications/Boxcryptor\ Classic.app/Contents/MacOS/Filesystems/bccfs.fs/Contents/Extensions/10.9 /Applications/Boxcryptor\ Classic.app/Contents/MacOS/Filesystems/bccfs.fs/Contents/Extensions/10.11 && ln -s /Applications/Boxcryptor\ Classic.app/Contents/Resources/bccfs.fs/Contents/Extensions/10.9 /Applications/Boxcryptor\ Classic.app/Contents/Resources/bccfs.fs/Contents/Extensions/10.11
7. If Gatekeeper gives you a message saying Boxcryptor Classic is corrupted, open System Preferences -> Security & Privacy and switch "Allow apps downloaded from" to "Anywhere". Open the app, then switch the setting back.
I am too disappointed that there will be no further support for this, but I do understand. However, I think a company of this size should not alienate it's user base - instead they should capitalize on the user base that still feels comfortable with the Boxcryptor Classic product. Heck I would even pay a yearly fee to have the product alive. Like everyone said, it's just a silly symlink... but charge away, it's a great product and I don't mind paying to have it in my daily workflow.
So the above works (in my case a reboot was needed) but if you have any issues - don't be shy.
A yearly, too much, every other year, I think that would be fine.
Or they could just version it like every other non-SaaS product on the market. I wouldn't have a problem paying $20 or $30 to keep this when/if FS APIs change. As I said, the encFS capabilities are the win for me since I can then sync to Linux (which I should add is NOT support by Boxcryptor).
Well, for me the price of having my files private in the cloud is worth to pay a yearly fee... that ensures continuity of the product - Trebiun how would you feel if you were paid every other time for your work?
I like my workflow, and I want it to continue uninterrupted...
I would feel pretty good being paid for anything for my work. I constantly hear how I should not get paid for my work, get told that I am a failure of a person, been told that I do not belong where I am because of my "class" (in America of all places), been heavily reprimanded for doing the right thing (and heavily praised once when it actually resulted in saving two lives who had no chance), and have not had a pay raise or promotion in years until I accomplished something highlighted beyond what my boss's recommendation could stop. Yes, I can say I would be more than happy to get that, and keep a legacy alive.
There are some business models that kill innovative projects and then there are those who reward the user base and brings them through every change of development. I personally found it much more affordable to say away from annual models and hand the option to upgrade when I want or can afford it. I know software out there with an annual cost for free upgrades that has not turned an upgrade in 4 going on 5 years and just announced that they are shuttering. $20 a year or $60 for lifetime...it stops working when it expires. I know some that only work on subscriptions and have seen many fail specifically due to this.
There is a balance that needs to be archived between innovation, labor, and maintenance. Get rid of innovation and people will start to complain. Look at parallels for example. They have not turned something truly innovating in years...just minor spec bumps. VMware finally got their directx platform working and now they have a chance to dominate over parallels. So why around $70 a year for parallels upgrade that mean nothing? I usually go every two years for $40 upgrade. I'll stop myself here before I go on forever. Anyhow, enjoy the working software again!
I'm also very disappointed by BoxCryptor team decision and luckly I haven't upgraded to El Capitan yet (I first looked around to see if any crucial application I use daily could have any problem....).
Thanks to the people who suggested the symlink workaround, but I'm afraid this won't last for long time. Infact I think it's just exploiting this security bug http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2015/09/drop-dead-simple-exploit-completely-bypasses-macs-malware-gatekeeper/
that Apple is going to fix soon.
So, what are the alternatives? Well, I've just asked a friend of mine who has been using El Capitan for weeks. He told me that with latest OSX Fuse, encfs (installed from brew) works nicely. Maybe encfs is not as easy to use as BoxCryptor was, but there are plenty of howto online that explain that.
Personally I'm planning to switch to SxDrive http://www.sxdrive.io an encrypted storage solution (end to end encrypted: if you loose your keys, you can't get your files back!) that works in a similar way to Dropbox, If you want to test it, please let me know and I will put in touch with them (I don't think it's possible to self-register an account yet).
Enjoy your privacy again!
You must log in to post.