Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPFS is the Distributed Web

ipfs.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 286 posts

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#271

Post by IanCal »

tscs37 wrote: post #120
IanCal wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what attack you're talking about then. If someone steals my key and points my IPNS location to a new file, I'd likely still be hosting the files right? > you need to actually encourage archiving of data to get resilient against attacks. Yes, but this feels like a distinct issue. Neither of these things are enough on their own (encouraging mirrors or providing the tech to distribute the hosting).

>I'd likely still be hosting the files right? Yes but the entire web points to the wrong files since you no longer own the IPNS location. It's similar to loosing access to your DNS configuration or loosing your GPG keys to an attacker.

> Yes but the entire web points to the wrong files since you no longer own the IPNS location.

Along with a link to all previous versions if there's a chain. And anyone pointing to a specific version will still see that rather than the new one.

> It's similar to loosing access to your DNS configuration

Yes.

> or loosing your GPG keys to an attacker.

I think that's a bit strong.

> >I think there was some discussion about having there be a chain

> Still same problem, if the private key gets leaked, a malicious attacker can manipulate the entries on the chain.

I'm really not sure that's right, IPNS doesn't give you the ability to edit content.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#272

Post by clueless404 »

slang800 wrote: post #268
clueless404 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having wifi on all day is one thing, actually using it is totally different. Just activate your wifi hotspot on your phone and start using it from your computer. See how fast the battery depletes. No matter what incentive scheme you device , it's not going to help you with your battery.

> No matter what incentive scheme you [devise], it's not going to help you with your battery. Obviously with certain incentives, battery would become irrelevant. If this hypothetical "IPFS ratio" were as valuable as (for example) what.cd ratio, I'd have no problem carrying around car battery to continue seeding. Thankfully, I don't think it would be possible for my phone to consume that much power in a day.

> Obviously with certain incentives, battery would become irrelevant.

Sure, cold hard cash would suffice, but imaginary Internet points won't do. But even with cash there comes a point where you would turn off IPFS, because the alternative would be to have a dead phone for the rest of the day.

> Thankfully, I don't think it would be possible for my phone to consume that much power in a day.

Perhaps not that much battery, but it is quite easy to deplete your battery in much less than a day by having your hotspot on constantly, which is what IPFS would require.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#273

Post by clueless404 »

slang800 wrote: post #266
clueless404 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Streaming is not downloading (and seeding).

Streaming _is_ downloading. It's just downloading _continuously_ as the content is presented. Whether or not you seed is an entirely separate issue and has nothing to do with streaming vs downloading.

> Streaming _is_ downloading.

No, it is not. Not from a legal perspective, which is all that matters in this context. With seeding you are making things worse for yourself, as you are not merely downloading but also distributing. Seeding is also relevant with regards to downloading, as IPFS automatically starts seeding what you download.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#274

Post by deno »

clueless404 wrote: post #270
deno wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s not forget the context here. We’re talking over-WiFi (not cellular) opportunistic sharing between two phones running an IPFS node. If you have anything to share at this point this is probably a good indication that both clients have some content in common. So first of all, transfers over WiFi while the phone is in use anyway are not that expensive, and more importantly there’s an opportunity to save a lot of ba…

> So for an insignificant battery investment, you can potentially save a lot of data and modem power in the long run. Having run many a phone into the ground while hotspotting, I do not consider the battery investment insignificant. It's annoying enough when I drain my own battery when using the hotspot, I would never allow complete strangers to do that to me.

As I said on mobile it would have to be very opportunistic, not something to be left in the background that keeps the phone awake.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#275

Post by clueless404 »

deno wrote: post #274
clueless404 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So for an insignificant battery investment, you can potentially save a lot of data and modem power in the long run. Having run many a phone into the ground while hotspotting, I do not consider the battery investment insignificant. It's annoying enough when I drain my own battery when using the hotspot, I would never allow complete strangers to do that to me.

As I said on mobile it would have to be very opportunistic, not something to be left in the background that keeps the phone awake.

Isn't that the direct antithesis of IPFS? Might as well just Airdrop whatever you want to share with your buddy if you are going to require a rendezvous mechanism.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#276

Post by tscs37 »

IanCal wrote: post #271
tscs37 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'd likely still be hosting the files right? Yes but the entire web points to the wrong files since you no longer own the IPNS location. It's similar to loosing access to your DNS configuration or loosing your GPG keys to an attacker.

> Yes but the entire web points to the wrong files since you no longer own the IPNS location. Along with a link to all previous versions if there's a chain. And anyone pointing to a specific version will still see that rather than the new one. > It's similar to loosing access to your DNS configuration Yes. > or loosing your GPG keys to an attacker. I think that's a bit strong. > >I think there was some discussion abo…

>And anyone pointing to a specific version will still see that rather than the new one.

That's an IPFS Hash tho, not IPNS. Differences matter.

>I think that's a bit strong.

Over time your IPNS could very well become your identity, linked everywhere in the net.

>IPNS doesn't give you the ability to edit content.

That is correct, but you can point at arbitrary content.

It's basically the equivalent to controlling the DNS A entry to a website, they can't modify the content and it's available under the same IP but they can still do a shitload of bad stuff because few people bother to actually link IP addresses.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#277

Post by deno »

clueless404 wrote: post #275
deno wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said on mobile it would have to be very opportunistic, not something to be left in the background that keeps the phone awake.

Isn't that the direct antithesis of IPFS? Might as well just Airdrop whatever you want to share with your buddy if you are going to require a rendezvous mechanism.

Opportunistic as in piggyback on active WiFi connection and non-idle state. P2P networks like Bittorrent pride themselves on being available despite high churn, so this is right up their alley.

The network works even if people only seed during a download. Obviously, that’s less than ideal. For mobile, though, this is perfectly fine.

The point of IPFS is you can do an ‘airdrop’ without having to coordinate it. You lookup content by hash— If it’s available locally? Great! If not just get it from remote and add to cache. Simple as that.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#278

Post by slang800 »

clueless404 wrote: post #267
slang800 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS archives is the effort that's going on right now to archive sites. Eventually there will be a system for automatically scraping & re-publishing content on IPFS.

Fair enough. Eventually somebody will have to do a lot of work to get all that done then.

Right now storage space and inefficiencies in the reference IPFS implementation are the biggest problems I've hit. Downloading sites is easy enough with grab-site, but my 24TB storage server is getting pretty full :( ... Gotta get more disks.

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#279

Post by clueless404 »

slang800 wrote: post #278
clueless404 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. Eventually somebody will have to do a lot of work to get all that done then.

Right now storage space and inefficiencies in the reference IPFS implementation are the biggest problems I've hit. Downloading sites is easy enough with grab-site, but my 24TB storage server is getting pretty full :( ... Gotta get more disks.

Say you grab a site. How do you announce that fact, verify that it is an unmodified copy, sync/merge/update copies and deduplicate assets between different snapshots?

Re: IPFS is the Distributed Web

#280

Post by clueless404 »

deno wrote: post #277
clueless404 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that the direct antithesis of IPFS? Might as well just Airdrop whatever you want to share with your buddy if you are going to require a rendezvous mechanism.

Opportunistic as in piggyback on active WiFi connection and non-idle state. P2P networks like Bittorrent pride themselves on being available despite high churn, so this is right up their alley. The network works even if people only seed during a download. Obviously, that’s less than ideal. For mobile, though, this is perfectly fine. The point of IPFS is you can do an ‘airdrop’ without having to coordinate it. You loo…

> Opportunistic as in piggyback on active WiFi connection and non-idle state.

That's a reasonable approach, but due to the synchronous requirement I guess the offload factor would be minimal. When I want to download something I might as well enable wifi and see if it's available locally. After I'm done there's really no incentive for me to keep seeding or even have wifi turned on.

> P2P networks like Bittorrent pride themselves on being available despite high churn, so this is right up their alley.

This really isn't applicable to opportunistic mobile use of IPFS, as you are unlikely to have a large enough local swarm to guarantee uptime or availability.

Post reply on HN