u/Strat0Blu

After a disastrous experience with a cloud service, I no longer knew which cloud to trust with my data.But one thing became clear to me: buying a ‘lifetime’ cloud storage plan is not a good choice!

---

Initially, I considered the major cloud services with a lower risk, such as Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive, and Dropbox, but I found some limitations with each of them, as well as relatively high costs.

Among other minor shortcomings that I won't mention to avoid lengthening the post, all three of the clouds listed lack end-to-end encryption. That is, data is encrypted on the sender's device before being uploaded to the cloud. The decryption keys remain on users' devices, so not even the cloud provider can read the content stored on its servers.

---

Having ruled out three of the major cloud services, I once again took a risk for cost reasons by choosing MEGA Cloud, which I had already been using on its free plan for six years. Its Pro I plan offers 3 TB of storage with a total annual transfer limit of 36 TB, at a cost of €99, paid on December 2025. It offers end-to-end encryption. Nevertheless, as a cloud storage service, I have found it to work well during my eight months of subscription, Apart from two problems, one of which was serious, which were resolved later.

---

It is not my intention to advertise MEGA, because I don’t like giving advice that could backfire on me, or, at best, give the impression that I am promoting a service for personal gain. Here, I am simply trying to describe my approach in a neutral way.

When fully operational, MEGA works well. It is easy to manage through its app which uses the browser for encryption, and it is fast for both uploads and downloads, although performance obviously depends on each user’s available bandwidth. In my case, I uploaded 1 TB in less than 14 hours. MEGA also uses data deduplication: if it already has the data, perhaps from previous uploads to other folders or collections, it does not upload it again, reducing both transfer time and bandwidth consumption.

So, at least in terms of uploads and downloads, it has been a good choice considering the annual cost.

As part of the plan, it offers unlimited syncs and backups for all your devices, a limited VPN, and S3/S4 data storage. Although this feature, which stores raw data without a hierarchy, is of little use to the average user.

It also allows data to be uploaded from your NAS (Synology in my case), either through the rather rigid proprietary MEGAcmd application or through the more flexible and powerful rclone. However, rclone has to be used with the brakes on, because aggressive uploads or massive deletions — especially of small files (!) — will inevitably result in a temporary ban on its API access. This was the first of the two problems I experienced. Support was unable to lift the ban, even when there were well-justified reasons to request it: the second problem.

For the average user, MEGA offers a good balance of storage capacity, overall performance, local encryption before uploading, ease of use, availability across personal mobile devices and NAS systems, a free basic VPN, and a reasonable annual cost. It is less advantageous in terms of service reliability: the rclone API ban lasted two months, meaning that for two months I could not back up my NAS data except through the very limited MEGA client.

Support was available but ultimately futile, as demonstrated on two occasions. MEGA appears to be problematic in one significant respect, which is the subject of further investigation.

MegaCloud can be considered good for the price because of:

1. Storage space offered

2. Local encryption implemented before upload

3. Basic VPN with multiple servers included in the price.

It cannot be considered acceptable because of:

1. Service inconsistencies observed over six months of use

2. Support is available, responsive but unhelpful on two personal occasions.

3. In my opinion, the encryption fails to meet the brand's core principle, as stated on the homepage at the time of this review: "Online privacy for everyone - Secure encrypted cloud storage by default."

In my opinion, the brand's core principle is not met because the vaunted local encryption (read: privacy) is performed after each file's hash has been calculated, that is, after the file has been identified based on the hash. For the purposes and effects of potential blacklist-based filtering. In my opinion, technically, privacy is violated.

Those who know, know

In the 2025 I was attracted by the overall terms for a lifetime cloud plan with Internxt, and the attractive price I paid on my invoice on April 16, 2025, for €190 (including VAT) for 3 TB.

After 16 months of use, what follows is my technical evaluation, posted three times in successive months on r/internxt, and removed the same number of times.

As I also wrote in the body of the original posts, what follows is not a retaliation (a revenge), but a thoughtful, balanced, and objective account of what happened during the contract, with the sole purpose of informing.

The post follows in full:

3TB "lifetime" subscription holder from 04/16/2025

Last update of this review: 07/08/2026

I am not responsible for any changes, improvements, deteriorations or limitations after the date of updating this review.

-

1. In light of what is described below, the service is not suitable for the storage of unique and non-replicable data.
2. No assistance
3. Singular contrast on Trustpilot between completely satisfied users at 37% and completely dissatisfied users at 37%

My support:

Intel i9 Pro K PC

64GB RAM Corsair Vengeance

Storage: NVMe: 1TB + 2TB

GPU- GeForce-RTX-4080-16GB

OS: Windows 11 64 bit Pro V25H2

Connection: FTTH Map-E - Nominal 2.5Gbps down/700 Mbps upload

Real upload: typically 150 Mbps - detected up to 500.

The same infrastructure was used with other cloud providers, obtaining results consistent with expected performance (approx. 1 TB loaded in new cloud in 14 hours).

---

Definition: bidirectional synchronization consists of automatic, continuous, coherent updating between source and destination: additions, modifications, deletions are replicated in both directions.

When I signed up for the plan, the website and information brochures advertised two-way sync. Backup was included. There were no upload limits. After 16 months of use, I can confirm that the functional experience of Internxt isn't worth the cost I paid.

For some time now, synchronization has no longer been listed in the brochure as a feature included in the plan. It is no longer included in my plan. and in any case, it doesn't work. Backup isn't included and in any case, it doesn't work. There are stringent upload constraints that block uploads via Cloudflare after a few minutes of activity.

Below are the main findings during daily use of the service:

Loading Issues:

1. Extremely variable speed, often negligible, with common cases of just a few Kbps, not compatible with the available line.
2. No recovery: interrupted uploads do not resume after frequent client disconnects or if the PC is turned off.
3. Incomplete uploads without error message: folders uploaded via browser remain blocked indefinitely.
4. In the last upload attempt, 254 folders (approximately 15,300 files) were partially uploaded, without clear indications of error, without providing details of what was uploaded and what was not.
5. Synchronization no longer working, backup no longer working, upload blocked after a few Mbits uploaded

Lack of verification tools

Internxt does not enumerate:

1. the quantity of objects uploaded to the cloud
2. the overall uploaded size, standard features in all major cloud services, as well as any OS - essential for even an approximate comparison between source and destination.

Limitations found on Windows 10/11

Synchronization does not occur in the following cases:

1. Objects with paths significantly shorter than 256 characters are excluded from uploading: 170 characters is already the limit, considering that the following 74-character string: "C:\Users\User\InternxtDrive - 21d6f245-a419-4844-aeef-003xyz*************\" is included in the overall path length. In other words, uploading a file with a path longer than 170/180 characters is unlikely to be successful.
2. new files, deletions, changes in the source are not replicated in the cloud. Changes in the cloud are not replicated to the source.
3. exclusion of empty folders and zero-size files.
4. exclusion of hidden folders and files or preceded by a dot.
5. frequent failures to upload large files and/or folders with numerous small files.
6. currently uploading is inhibited after uploading negligible volumes

Internxt for Android:

Only allows loading of individual objects. The hierarchical structure of files and folders is not replicated on the cloud.

Support:

Help can only be requested via chatbot. A notice informing you that replies will be sent via email: for new users, up to 10 days later, and for existing users, even never.

Any replies, if delivered, are in any case useless because they arrive too late, incomplete, with misunderstandings that require further investigation and thus delay the solution.

In my case, I received a few replies initially, but then all communication stopped.

However, even if replies arrive, they're useless because they're incomplete, with misunderstandings requiring further investigation, further delaying resolution.

In my case some response at the beginning, and then all communication stopped.

Conclusions:

In light of the problems encountered I consider the experience with Internxt to be technically unsuccessful, the unreliable service for the custody of unique or non-replicable data, the time dedicated and the amount paid for the "lifetime" plan to be considered lost.

----------

After purchasing Internxt Cloud with high expectations for its features, as advertised on the Internxt website, I discovered I'd signed up for a cloud that doesn't work. Furthermore, the features advertised and included in my paid plan are now being denied to me.

I have spent a lot of time identifying the many shortcomings of Internetxt, which I felt were appropriate to disclose, shortcomings supported by concrete evidence that occurred over a period of sixteen months, not two days. My intent is not to use Reddit as a sounding board for my disappointment, for revenge, but to document Internxt's repeatable and verifiable shortcomings. I share my experience to provide detailed, user-focused insights.

Dear moderator, if you truly believe my opinion isn't worthy of publication please at least send me a private message explaining the reasons. Your response will definitively close the matter.
---

Thank you for your understanding.

Sorry, this post has been removed by the moderators of r/internxt.

Sorry, it's very unfortunate to pollute the forum with complaints without offering solutions, but I'm a basic user, notoriously stupid: I'm incapable of improving software.

But before the complaints, a word of praise:

I really like Betterbird for its architecture, its security, its many useful options, and its constant updates.

A little less so for its average (!) complexity.

On the other hand, I hate it and can't help but mention it because its slow startup annoys me. It prevents me from using Betterbird exclusively on a daily basis—currently v140.13—even on an Intel i7 Pro K PC, with 64 GB of Corsair DDR5 RAM and solid WD drives: it takes up to a minute to boot up! It's unbearable.

The delay in opening, in some cases, would even be bearable, but many sites these days use the F2A key to log in, sending codes via email:

you can't wait forever—every time—to log in...

What a drag!

If there's a magic solution, please let me know.

For the record, I've already interrogated three AIs: lots of talk, no concrete results...