3 ms·
This is silly. You could say the same for files CURLd from servers over http today. Did you know that when you download files from the internet, you're putting
by xd1936 4y ago
This is silly. You could say the same for files CURLd from servers over http today. Did you know that when you download files from the internet, you're putting yourself at risk of the server tampering with your file before serving it to you??
- remram 4y agoThe server giving you the wrong file is not "tampering". The word refers to something in the middle making changes. For the web, TLS provides tamper-resistance. Accessing the web through a HTTP proxy would allow tampering, similarly to accessing IPFS through a gateway.
- sneak 4y agohttp urls are not content-addressed. ipfs urls are. a better analogy than http urls would be git commit hashes.
- IggleSniggle 4y agoThen like with git, couldn't you cryptographically sign ipfs urls to have a public-trust guarantee of provenance? Either GPG signed or perhaps a CA?
- jstanley 4y agoBut the point of IPFS is to do better than this. The point of IPFS is that the server can't tamper with the content because it would break the hash, but if you're using an untrusted proxy then it is just as bad as using an untrusted proxy for your normal web browsing.