Add support for remote non-cloud database

[the-moog]

Feature Request

A feature you'd like to see

Currently there is a choice of either Microsoft or Google and there is are reasons to not use either.
There is WebDav, but a backend for that is complicated and needs NextCloud or something similar.
How about a docker container that contains a simple server, that could run on something like a Raspberry Pi or TV app. Your DB needs to be more than one place, that's all.
That server simply take connections from Tusk
The server would do regular internal backups to a specified count.

Alternatives you've considered

There are none if you have a Google or Microsoft account or a NAS locally.
The file mechanism does not work as it copies the file into the browser.

Additional remarks

Maybe use web-sockets or MQTT? I am not a browser app developer so I don't know what the browser sandbox permits. Or rather than record base it could be file based using SCP.

Perhaps have it such the locked DB is stored in the browser and a sync app copies the changes to the remote side.
That way you have at least two copies of the DB without the need to actually ensure the single storage
location survives a disaster.

[subdavis]

Thanks for opening this discussion topic. Inventing a new file transfer protocol is pretty far outside the scope of Tusk as a browser extension. For self-hosting your files, WebDAV is supported.

There is WebDav, but a backend for that is complicated and needs NextCloud or something similar.

WebDAV is implemented by tons of servers and works over HTTP. As you note, Tusk is limited to HTTP and extensions of it.

https://hub.docker.com/r/bytemark/webdav/ is an example of a much lighter webdav server.

I'd be sort of interested in adding the S3 protocol since so many backends support it and you can run storage servers that speak S3 on your own hardware.

As far as HA and replication goes, that's well outside of scope and not really something Tusk needs to worry about.

Edit

For what it's worth, the software system you're describing sounds a lot like BitWarden. If you want one stack that does everything rather than KeePass's DIY philosophy, it's pretty good. I use https://github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden myself.