3 ms·

Not true. You share: 1. Files you Pinned (think of as torrent seeding) 2. Files you have in your IPFS cache a. Cache files are added to when you reques

by kefka 10y ago

Not true. You share: 1. Files you Pinned (think of as torrent seeding) 2. Files you have in your IPFS cache a. Cache files are added to when you request IPFS content b. The garbage collection triggers and removes non-pinned content at regular intervals 3. The default files that are added to a new IPFS repo (unless you removed them or init'ed using the appropriate option to not include them) To answer the GP's question: As long as you don't pin child porn, and you don't look for child porn, there's 0% chance in IPFS-land.

b101010 10y ago
Would (a) not be a. Cache files are added to when _something causes a request for_ IPFS content The distinction being that "something" is not always a direct action from the user. If content on IPFS (ie a web page?) can reference and load content from other addresses (assumption) then could someone end up in the situation where they are "hosting" (from the cache) something they would not expect to be? (until the garbage collection clears it). If this seems far fetched, A submission to HN the other day seemed to surprise a few people[1] as it made a http request to a adult website to check if they had an active session (but did not display any content). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692389 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692389
- mekaj 10y ago
  This is true and good to keep in mind, but it's also an inescapable risk of any network involving autonomous agents. We're also susceptible to downloading content that's different than advertised (e.g. Rickrolling).
  - kefka 10y ago
    And in all honesty, the whole "but child porn OMG" is a non-sequitor. Child porn already exists on the web directly. And Tor Hidden Sites. And Freenet. And other places. The real problem with CP is that fact there's no mens-rea requirement. A script can download it to your browser cache under blank images. It's in your cache, and you have no clue. In the current situation, you are illegal. With mens-rea, you aren't - there was no willingness to get it, therefore you aren't at fault. Think of this as shoplifter compared to something that fell in your cart you missed. Same idea. (In all honesty, I hold to Stallman's idea of CP shouldn't be illegal, period. It's a proof of a crime. Snuff videos of people being murdered isn't illegal, although the murdering part very much is. Child abuse is illegal, as well it should be, but proof of child abuse shouldn't.)
    - viraptor 10y ago
      You still have to convince others there was no willingness. And it's much easier to convince them of that if you're not also sending the copies to other people.
      - nickpsecurity 10y ago
        Exactly. Stay away from anything that could even be believed to be hosting felony content. I always tell people that, if they do run it, run it through some hosted server at a reputable place so the police just grab that box. They might still hit a residence but they might not if they find nothing on the box they grab while it's active.
        mirimir 10y ago
        It also helps if the hosting facility doesn't know who you are.

by kefka 10y ago

b101010 10y ago

Would (a) not be a. Cache files are added to when _something causes a request for_ IPFS content The distinction being that "something" is not always a direct action from the user. If content on IPFS (ie a web page?) can reference and load content from other addresses (assumption) then could someone end up in the situation where they are "hosting" (from the cache) something they would not expect to be? (until the garbage collection clears it). If this seems far fetched, A submission to HN the other day seemed to surprise a few people[1] as it made a http request to a adult website to check if they had an active session (but did not display any content). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692389 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12692389

mekaj 10y ago
This is true and good to keep in mind, but it's also an inescapable risk of any network involving autonomous agents. We're also susceptible to downloading content that's different than advertised (e.g. Rickrolling).
- kefka 10y ago
  And in all honesty, the whole "but child porn OMG" is a non-sequitor. Child porn already exists on the web directly. And Tor Hidden Sites. And Freenet. And other places. The real problem with CP is that fact there's no mens-rea requirement. A script can download it to your browser cache under blank images. It's in your cache, and you have no clue. In the current situation, you are illegal. With mens-rea, you aren't - there was no willingness to get it, therefore you aren't at fault. Think of this as shoplifter compared to something that fell in your cart you missed. Same idea. (In all honesty, I hold to Stallman's idea of CP shouldn't be illegal, period. It's a proof of a crime. Snuff videos of people being murdered isn't illegal, although the murdering part very much is. Child abuse is illegal, as well it should be, but proof of child abuse shouldn't.)
  - viraptor 10y ago
    You still have to convince others there was no willingness. And it's much easier to convince them of that if you're not also sending the copies to other people.
    - nickpsecurity 10y ago
      Exactly. Stay away from anything that could even be believed to be hosting felony content. I always tell people that, if they do run it, run it through some hosted server at a reputable place so the police just grab that box. They might still hit a residence but they might not if they find nothing on the box they grab while it's active.
      - mirimir 10y ago
        It also helps if the hosting facility doesn't know who you are.