Le 01/06/2014 07:59, grarpamp a écrit :
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Aymeric Vitte <[email protected]> wrote:
is that those facilitators are indeed interfacing
with the bidirectional BT
(as server [publishing, takedownable],
and as client [downloading, a lesser action]) protocol.
As client only, they behave as total free riders to be as discrete as
possible, they don't publish anything, don't say what they have (because
Ok. They will have issues with trackers that enforce ratio,
but that is the design tradeoff to maintain the 'lesser action'.
They don't use trackers, only the DHT. It might be seen as a kind of
unfair participation but I don't think they hurt anything and that's the
only way to preserve anonymity.
That's the goal but starting a P2P without any content is a kind of
difficult, originally the bittorrent client was not an idea of us, that's
what people want, for streaming mainly.
Or better... availability is no more than running a daemon
homed to whatever the new network is, against the
content already existing on users disks, by plugging the
app in the middle into it... like BT/ftp/web. Users
won't need to create their data from zero, worst
case is a little adaptation.
That's exactly what the Peersm clients are doing, they are not there
just to bridge with bittorrent or other networks, they are there to keep
the content alive in case peers close their browsers, peers that have
existing contents can upload them locally inside their browsers or/and
install a Peersm client that will access the content on their disk,
still anonymously, nobody can know what they have.
they do this unconsciously so they should not be eligible to take down
facilitators are a small part of the project, their importance is more to
keep the content alive inside peersm since the browsers peers are ephemeral
(until maybe there are many many peers)
Until then it seems, unlike tor relays which are 100%
transit, they are storing content meant for the inside.
If the content going into them from the outside is bad enough,
that could get them looked at, and then shutdown,
depending on how strong provisions regarding 'content
stored unconsciously on behalf of users' is in their area.
Probably a lesser risk.
For bittorrent, they are 100% relays too, they don't store anything.
They can be detected only by those they are connected too, which are
those that are delivering the content, so unlikely to be copyright
enforcers unless they are "spies" delivering wrong pieces for example,
which can be detected, and anyway these ones can not know the
"magnitude" of the action of the Peersm clients (unless incorrect I am
not aware of bt mechanisms where someone else registers you in the DHT),
so the action is unconscious and not very easy to detect.
For peersm, they are storing content but, again, nobody can know what
they have.
To be fair they could bridge the peersm contents to bittorrent, the same
way peersm is working (ie registering themself in the bt DHT not as the
one having the content but as the one knowing someone else has it,
without knowing who it is), that's not in place for now but it would be
possible to do it one day if there is an interest.
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
--
Peersm : http://www.peersm.com
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
