What follows are some miscellaneous peer-to-peer/friend-to-friend/federated forms/self-hosted services for people who worry that their favourite online service might be politically censored by state power or corporate manipulation or just dickheads.
Perhaps you want communications to function without a single point of failure. Or maybe you just freedom from centralised surveillance of your social connections. Presumably most of us would like those things to some extent. The question is if we wish to pay the various convenience costs of not using a corporate-backed state-approved product.
Ideally I’d like to find robust ways of participating in the internet bidirectionally, in non-real-time, without assuming the internet is plugged in and working, and without requiring all participants be massive geeks.
Related: the unidirectional offline internet and sneakernets, and low bandwidth hacks, DIY internet infrastructure. Note that chat clients, social media and file syncing are covered elsewhere, which biases what remains. If you want to do this truly securely, a hardened os might be advisable.
Contrast self-hosted, federated and P2P options. By “self hosted” I mean when I run your own server for my own stuff. In federated systems there are still servers, but anyone can run one for a community and these community servers collaborate for some kind of global coverage. In P2P every client is also a server, and therefore everyone is peers. Further taxonomising is uninteresting for my current purpose.
There seem to be two priorities that developers bring to making peer-to-peer networks.
- implement a P2P application
- reinvent the internet as an intrinsically P2P system
You run an app on your computer which finds peers on the internet somehow, and does something with those peers. The most famous example is probably BitTorrent (for downloading and verifying things), or the Bitcoin blockchain (for arranging financial transactions).
radicle is a serverless setup for git, which is already a peer-to-peer system as far as source code management goes — but sometimes you want to coordinate with a few more affordances.
They have a kind of git GUI called upstream. Currently, like many decentralised apps, they have a weird permissions model, where everything is public, which is a weird kind of cryptographic security. (“ah-HAH
Create and fork websites directly from your computer. You control your data. No blockchain required.
They also have pointed blockchain-mania snark:
We quickly ruled out the blockchain variants (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Namecoin) as the core network model of Beaker for the following reasons:
- Proof-of-work and global ledger distribution are inefficient. So far, blockchain networks have struggled with throughput as they scale. Betting on a blockchain includes the risk that throughput may decrease over time, and/or that users will be forced to download large datasets to participate.
- The requirement to use global consensus on all transactions results in a direct costs for operations in the form of transaction fees. We know that many network operations do not require global consensus, and therefore a blockchain makes a poor default for applications.
- We believe Proof-of-work is wasteful, and we have ethical reservations about the expenditure of resources to sustain PoW. At this time, Proof-of-stake is still an unproven alternative, but we are interested in its potential.
- We have concerns over governance models. By investing decision-making in miners, the blockchain networks have given power to the entities with the most mining resources. […]
Rhetorical entertainment value aside, whilst I do find this model elegant, it works, for now, only for rich nerds with desktop computers and time to replace their nice corporatised internet with an ugly experimental broken DIY internet. It doesn’t work on smartphones, so the people with the most tenuous internet will not use it and it will not take over the world. I don’t think the founders would claim otherwise; they are all about proof-of-concept. Perhaps some future iteration might change stuff?
$ wormhole send README.md Sending 7924 byte file named 'README.md' On the other computer, please run: wormhole receive Wormhole code is: 7-crossover-clockwork Sending (<-10.0.1.43:58988).. 100%|=========================| 7.92K/7.92K [00:00<00:00, 6.02MB/s] File sent.. waiting for confirmation Confirmation received. Transfer complete.
% wormhole receive Enter receive wormhole code: 7-crossover-clockwork Receiving file (7924 bytes) into: README.md ok? (y/n): y Receiving (->tcp:10.0.1.43:58986).. 100%|===========================| 7.92K/7.92K [00:00<00:00, 120KB/s] Received file written to README.md
Elegant, no? Tragically it doesn’t yet work on mobile platforms, only desktop.
Bugout by Chris Mccormick is a miniature decentralised web proof-of-concept based purely in the browser.
Build back-end web services that run in a browser tab.
- Host backend services without a VPS, domain or SSL cert.
- Anyone can deploy by simply opening a browser tab.
- Can be “self-hosted” by leaving a browser tab open on a PC.
- Client-server over WebRTC instead of HTTPS.
This is fostering a little ecosystem including rpi bugout boxes.
Classic unix maildrop distributed syncing via UUCP is having a resurgence. See the Dataforge UUCP for some of that.
The whole internet is terrible! Let us make one that is less terrible! There is a collective action problem in getting people to switch to such networks, which anyone who has tried to persuade peers not to facebook them will appreciate. There is also an incentive problem in getting people to contribute resources; So if you are using a distributed anonymous system then presumably everyone is storing chunks of other people’s data. How do you incentivise that? Some kind of verification that you are pulling your weight? Some kind of blockchain?
The flagship social internet-as-social-network thing. See its section under DIY social networks.
This project claims to be building an actual decentralised, internet-collapse-ready web replacement, by getting you to all store files for one another.. Still geeky and badly explained, but an actual ecosystem is reportedly growing around it with ties to the blockchain community. The latter is due I suppose to the “complementary” protocole filecoin, a blockchain incentivisation scheme for storing files.
The average lifespan of a web page is 100 days. Remember GeoCities? The web doesn’t anymore. It’s not good enough for the primary medium of our era to be so fragile.
IPFS keeps every version of your files and makes it simple to set up resilient networks for mirroring of data.
Developing world. Offline. Natural disasters. Intermittent connections. All trivial compared to interplanetary networking. The networks we’re using are so 20th Century. We can do better.
IPFS powers the creation of diversely resilient networks which enable persistent availability with or without Internet backbone connectivity.
One interesting service is the decentralised databases such as orbitdb.
Awesome IPFS lists some applications.
Zeronet promises “Open, free and uncensorable websites, using Bitcoin cryptography and BitTorrent network”.
I am not convinced yet by this promise purely because there were too many buzzwords at once and I am grumpy today. Judge for yourself, though.
How does it work?
- After starting
zeronet.pyyou will be able to visit zeronet sites using
- When you visit a new zeronet site, it tries to find peers using the BitTorrent network so it can download the site files (html, css, js…) from them.
- Each visited site is also served by you.
- Every site contains a
content.jsonfile which holds all other files in a sha512 hash and a signature generated using the site’s private key.
- If the site owner (who has the private key for the site address) modifies the site, then he/she signs the new
content.jsonand publishes it to the peers. Afterwards, the peers verify the
content.jsonintegrity (using the signature), they download the modified files and publish the new content to other peers.
This bittorrent thing sounds practically identical to the dat one although presumably with some protocol differences that us user schlubs don’t care about.
I2P is an anonymous network built on top of the internet. It allows users to create and access content and build online communities on a network that is both distributed and dynamic. It is intended to protect communication and resist monitoring by third parties such as ISPs.
It seems somewhat Tor-like but with less interest in proxying to the normal internet, rather funnelling you into local distributed services of some kind…?
Freenet aims to be a peer data storage layer that you can build services on.
Freenet can be thought of as a large storage device. When you store a file in it, you receive a key which can be used to retrieve the file. When you supply Freenet with a key, it returns the appropriate file (if it is located). The storage space is distributed among all connected nodes on Freenet.
Freenet is a peer-to-peer network which is both decentralized and anonymized. The nodes that you connect to only know their nearest neighbours and have no idea about how the network as a whole is structured.
LBRY differs from the status quo in three big ways:
- Coupled payment and access. If desired, the person who publishes to lbry://rhapsody-film#e1029aaa08bef8e9225efcbfb94a895e9bbdc8ea can charge a fee to users that view the content.
- Decentralized and distributed. Content published to LBRY is not specific to one computer or network, making LBRY robust to failure and disruption.
- Community controlled. No party other than the publisher (including us) can unilaterally remove or block content on the LBRY network.2