[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /tech/ - 33927

File: 1485479125393.png (57.56 KB, 300x300, Zeronet_logo.png)



I'm really, really surprised I haven't seen any discussion of ZeroNet on here yet. Cryptographically verified decentralized distribution of web applications. I think this kind of thing is exactly what we need to re-democratize the net, moving away from corporate owned silos. Especially for sites whose biggest costs are infrastructure and bandwidth.


1) There is an issue with the way "Zero IDs" are handled, allowing for doxing, at least acording to 8/tech/. Take that with a grain of salt.

2), On sites with user-generated content, you could easily end up downloading illegal content. You can hide the illegal content using CSS/JS, and the user would probably never know it was there. There is no way to remove the user-generated content.

3) No anonyminity. Your IP address is exposed with the Bittorrent swarm. The only way around this is:
---Which costs money, and could be used to exploit you.
---Which hogs the bandwidth of the Tor network, and is likely to expose you.

4) How would you go about hosting something like a database without compromising your users? The DB is shared about with everyone.

You can either have anonyminity or distribution, but never both, it seems.


IPFS is better for static content and zeronet is designed for dynamic content. Since static content is significantly easier to manage on a distributed network than dynamic content IPFS just performs better.


File: 1485483343360.png (51.06 KB, 200x151, rain.gif)

For 2, a simple script that checks the checksum of downloaded files against known illegal content would help to mitigate the problem of accidentally downloading CP.


the problem i have with it is that its completely dependent on javascript and the main developer does not care



Isn't #2 a problem with *any* site that allows user-generated content, not just ZeroNet sites?


File: 1485498118481.png (268.22 KB, 200x200, 1453949218757-3.png)

For people complaining about "illegal content": You can't have an uncensorable network and expect for everything on there to adhere to your sensibilities. Visit sites you trust and/or stick with clearnet.


The point is that with ZeroNet, you may very well end up *distributing* illegal content.
If you don't use a VPN or Tor with it, you might even end up going to prison for that. (We all know how incompetent the law tends to be when faced with technology they don't know).

That being said, I think ZeroNet is soykaf. Because you can't disable JS when using it (or block it using NoScript), distributing malware / attacking users is all too easy.
There's a bunch of superior platforms, if you want to distribute static content (ipfs, Freenet, GNUnet).
A way of distributing dynamic web applications is unnecessary in the first place, as those won't scale as well as specifically engineered distributed applications (OpenBazaar, Syndie) will. (Especially not if distributed via ZeroNet).


>For 2, a simple script that checks the checksum of downloaded files against known illegal content would help to mitigate the problem of accidentally downloading CP.
Come on, you don't really expect that to work out, do you?
If I wanted you to download my CP, I'd just change one least significant bit somewhere, changing the hash completely and you'd happily start seeding it.


What is the point of this? Someone please inform me.


Making money for its creator, like most badly thought out technology?


Yea I saw some videos and it's not interesting at all man, it is like kicking dead whales down the beach.


It has very bad security since the creators personally said they are not going to be focusing on that so anyone can just check anything You personally post through your Zero ID among other things.

And the already mentioned un-stoppable downloads of anything potentially illegal.

I loved the idea as well, but sadly, this isn't quite the right thing.