When comparing Laverna vs Cryptomator, the Slant community recommends Cryptomator for most people. In the question“What are the best tools/apps/extensions to help keep my data private?” Cryptomator is ranked 11th while Laverna is ranked 13th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Supports tasks
Application also supports tasks. Adding tasks as easy as in GitHub.
None of the developers can get access to personal data because they are using IndexedDB and localStorage. In fact all information will be stored only on client-side.
Pro No registration required
Pro Several editing modes
Laverna supports several editing modes: distraction-free mode, preview mode and normal.
In settings page it is possible to enable synchronizing with cloud storage. After that all information can be accessed from anywhere.
Simple and fast to learn and use.
Pro Encrypts all data on the client's side
Laverna can encrypt all notes on client side with SJCL library and no one, except the user, can get access to them.
Pro Good Markdown support
Laverna web app uses pagedown and ACE editor.
Pro Remote storage
Supports the remoteStorage protocol for personal privacy data storage.
Pro Open source
All code is open source and available on GitHub.
Pro Free and open source
Pro Transparent encryption
Pro AES individual file encryption
No accounts. No backdoors.
Pro Passphrase bruteforce protection (scrypt)
Pro Virtual hard drive file access
Drag and drop.
Pro Fast encryption and decryption
Available for Windows, Mac and Linux on desktop and iOS, Android for mobile.
Pro Works with any cloud platform
Works with any cloud-based services, including Dropbox and Google Drive.
Con No drag'n'drop image upload
Con Still a lot of bugs to squash
Laverna is still in early stages of development and as such not all functionality is well tested.
Con Android version is paid
Con Bugs with deleting of files
Sometimes files cannot be deleted and there is no working solution/fix available yet
Con Current WebDAV is a buggy on Windows
The used WebDAV implemention shows wrong available capacity and has a limitation in the file size. The developers are aware of these problems and working on a better solution.
Con Compatible with Android versions 4.3 and up only
Con Slower speeds
Encypting speeds are slower then regular uploads, larger files particularly video files often cannot complete transfer without errors.
Con No camera upload functionality
Cannot automatically back up photos on mobile devices replacing the need for Google drive or iOS fully. User then has to go and either manually select photos for upload or use cloud service and then encrypt defeating the purpose on mobile clients.