> You can access the data through a VPN. Okay, and then law enforcement asks the VPN. Yeah, it improves matters some, but we're talking about a huge book archi

> You can access the data through a VPN. Okay, and then law enforcement asks the VPN. Yeah, it improves matters some, but we're talking about a huge book archive here. People aren't going to maintain OpSec > If necessary, the hosts can also encrypt the filenames and data so that, until law enforcement gets the encryption key, they can't know who accesses what (public key and other necessary info would be communicated through Signal). That's a plan suitable for some sort terrorist organization maybe, but exactly how is that going to work for an archive of millions of books that are intended to be served to the general public? What's the key distribution mechanism? How do you distribute keys to everyone but the cops? > Do you have to explicitly pin the data? If so then this is an issue. If not, and you just pin random chunks, then if we normalize people using IPFS this will be solved. If we normalize it enough, there will be too many people hosting IPFS for law enforcement to reasonably take down. IPFS isn't Freenet. My understanding is that it's a content-addressable, multi-source system. Meaning the main different thing from plain HTTP is that stuff is named by hash, and that if there's a dozen people serving a given file, then the system can spread the load among them, or tolerate some of them going offline. You ask for hash X, the system figures out where to get it. Unless people make the intentional choice to mirror content, then it's not very different from serving stuff over HTTP, only with a worse user experience. What you suggest sounds more like Freenet, but I doubt that it'd work great even there. Freenet does the "store random chunks" sort of thing, but this means that it's extremely inefficient, and easily loses data. Freenet was made for plausible deniability, so any storage is probabilistic, and data is replicated as it moves through the network and eventually lost if nodes go offline or it just falls out of storage due to the lack of interest. Storing 31TB would require a lot of nodes dedicating a lot of storage, and a lot of interest in accessing all of that data on a regular basis. > If we normalize it enough, there will be too many people hosting IPFS for law enforcement to reasonably take down. Or if we just get enough activists that are willing to risk being fined or arrested. That's not a great plan for something that already got people into legal trouble