• BitTorrent’s Project Maelstrom will host websites in torrents
    20 replies, posted
[url]http://www.extremetech.com/internet/198578-bittorrents-project-maelstrom-will-host-websites-in-torrents[/url] [QUOTE]When you enter a URL and hit enter, your computer reaches out to a server someplace in the world to access a website. Sometimes a site is stored on a few servers for redundancy or load balancing, but the model is functionally the same. BitTorrent, the company behind the popular file sharing protocol, is looking to change the way websites are hosted by keeping the data not on a centralized server, but on the home computers of users. These sites would be split up into pieces just like a file shared via a torrent. BitTorrent calls this system Project Maelstrom, and it’s getting very close to reality. Project Maelstrom is built on a modified version of Chromium, the open source project that backs Google’s Chrome browser. If we extend the file sharing analogy to Project Maelstrom, the modified browser is basically your torrent client. You enter a web address, and the browser connects to a “swarm” of users already accessing the site who have pieces of it ready to send over. These bits are assembled into the final product and displayed normally. If it works as intended, you won’t notice a difference in the functionality of these sites. [/QUOTE]
What a time to be alive. That's a pretty cool idea.
What will this mean for Tor browser?
[QUOTE=Satansick;47046344]What will this mean for Tor browser?[/QUOTE] Nothing. Browsing on Project Maelstrom won't be anonymous, just decentralized. Will of course be different to filter than normal http sites, but could still be done possibly based on how the network works.
[QUOTE=HarryHy;47046372]Nothing. Browsing on Project Maelstrom won't be anonymous, just decentralized. Will of course be different to filter than normal http sites, but could still be done possibly based on how the network works.[/QUOTE] What if you combine this with tor?
What will this mean for security, particularly maliciously modifying data which is requested. Is this possible with hashed data?
[QUOTE=Superwafflez;47046443]What will this mean for security, particularly maliciously modifying data which is requested. Is this possible with hashed data?[/QUOTE] I was wondering how it would even keep a synchronized data set. Sounds like it would just be for mostly static websites.
A step closer to meshnets.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47046389]What if you combine this with tor?[/QUOTE] "Combining" it with Tor isn't something that's just done. They're different technologies, and in essence what you're asking probably has been done by Project Freenet.
I don't see how this can even work for anything other than static sites.
[QUOTE=mobrockers;47046512]I don't see how this can even work for anything other than static sites.[/QUOTE] 1) Static websites 2) Dynamic websites which can be easily hacked 3) Dynamic websites with strong encryption which is backed by mining power compared to bitcoin 4) Dynamic websites, one central server + P2P clients are just for cache
This would be awesome for the static content of dynamic websites. for example, Facebook could host all their stylesheets, page layout, and some public content with Maelstrom, and then just host user data with a traditional server. easy peasy.
There has been a big push lately to decentralize the net and take control away from the USA (who basically run the show right now). I was always a bit concerned about it but once we learned about the NSA, the importance of disconnecting from the USA grew dramatically. I welcome this project and all the others like it. No one should get to dominate the internet, it should belong to all of us.
[QUOTE=Fourier;47046635]1) Static websites 2) Dynamic websites which can be easily hacked 3) Dynamic websites with strong encryption which is backed by mining power compared to bitcoin 4) Dynamic websites, one central server + P2P clients are just for cache[/QUOTE] With dynamic websites, you run into the same issues that bitcoin has. First of all, someone just needs to control the nodes you connect to, and the content you see will not be what you want. Second of all, even with just P2P client for cache, the speed of the cache may be slower if the nodes do not present the content as fast as the cache could. This, in turn, also presents the issue of popularity, which means that content not popular enough to be cached at all, may not be available at all, or at best be available from a very slow connection.
What if someone uploads child pornography to the site and pieces of it are distributed to connecting users' computers. :tinfoil:
[QUOTE=spiritlol;47048634]What if someone uploads child pornography to the site and pieces of it are distributed to connecting users' computers. :tinfoil:[/QUOTE] That's not how torrent works.
Networks that [I]do[/I] work by storing all data on random peers, rather than only those actively trying to share specific data - such as Freenet - get around that problem by only storing encrypted chunks on each peer. Thus, you cannot know what is being stored on your machine, and you never get the full file anyway (unless, like any other user wanting it, you specifically ask for it). And I've never heard of someone being sued for running a Freenet node, though admittedly the network's not big enough as to draw much attention.
Does this mean (D)DOS would be ineffective? [editline]31st January 2015[/editline] More seeders faster download, right? [editline]31st January 2015[/editline] Unless you could send requests just to download and never to upload. Should be interesting
Let me guess, it's yet more closed source bullshit. That company hasn't made anything actually significant in ages. Sync would be really nice if they opened it up, so you could integrate it into things, and improve it.
[QUOTE=The DooD;47046450]I was wondering how it would even keep a synchronized data set. Sounds like it would just be for mostly static websites.[/QUOTE] It could work with a set of "Authed" peers who would propagate the latest snapshot of the site when needed.
[QUOTE=nikomo;47049001]Let me guess, it's yet more closed source bullshit. That company hasn't made anything actually significant in ages. Sync would be really nice if they opened it up, so you could integrate it into things, and improve it.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I guess. I stopped giving any shits about Sync when syncthing came out. And it's pretty solid by now. Doesn't have an official GTK gui though, but third parties can provide that (as well as other services). I'd say it's worth it. The QR code thing is especially useful when using the syncthing app on Android, where you can simply take a picture and have it load the nodes you want.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.