3 ms·

ACLs are fundamentally incompatible with blockchains. Your only solution is to encrypt those files, and have off-chain key management if you ever want to revoke

ACLs are fundamentally incompatible with blockchains. Your only solution is to encrypt those files, and have off-chain key management if you ever want to revoke access.

rglullis 3y ago
IPFS and distributed filesystems have nothing to do with blockchains.
- mhluongo 3y ago
  Filecoin, the thing funding IPFS, certainly does :)
  - dartos 3y ago
    Sure, but IPFS, the technology, doesn’t.
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  IPFS is entwined with (and pretty much 100% backed by) Filecoin, which is a blockchain. Introducing a point of incompatibility would be a nonstarter.
  - rglullis 3y ago
    Nothing is "entwined". I can download kubo and run it without even knowing what Filecoin is. In fact, every user of Brave browser does it. Same thing for projects like OrbitDB. Same thing for customers of Pinata.
    - pclmulqdq 3y ago
      I can download F2FS and run it on my RAM. That doesn't mean that F2FS isn't entwined with NVMe SSDs. In fact, while F2FS is a ludicrous example, this happens regularly with filesystems. The core design of filesystems is still built assuming that a block device will be behind it. IPFS is the same way, just s/block device/blockchain/.
      - rglullis 3y ago
        I'm sorry, I really have no idea where you are trying to go with this. - You can have files on IPFS and no blockchain whatsoever "behind it". - IPFS itself makes no use of blockchains as an abstration for data storage or file organization - If all the blockchains networks and nodes disappeared overnight, no IPFS nodes would be affected. I don't know if you actually used any of that or just going by hearsay.
simpsond 3y ago
ACLs are compatible with some blockchains. Token gating, merkle proofs, and RBAC are fairly common in smart contracts. See: https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/2.x/access-control#role-based-access-control https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/2.x/access-control#r...
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  In terms of interacting with smart contracts, yes. In terms of accessing data, no. All data on a blockchain is public and immutable, and that's the point.
unicornmama 3y ago
But nginx HTTP bridge with copyright banlist is OK…
fulladder 3y ago
IPFS does not in any way involve a blockchain. There's a separate "layer on top of IPFS" called Filecoin that does involve a blockchain. (From a technical point of view, it's not really a layer on top, more of a re-implementation of IPFS with a blockchain.) I've worked on IPFS and know many of the key people at PL. They really are not blockchain people or cryptobros. They are much different from anyone else in crypto I have encountered. But ultimately they have to fund their activities somehow, and this is the reality of where the business potential is in P2P circa mid-2020s.

ACLs are fundamentally incompatible with blockchains. Your only solution is to encrypt those files, and have off-chain key management if you ever want to revoke access.

rglullis 3y ago

IPFS and distributed filesystems have nothing to do with blockchains.

mhluongo 3y ago
Filecoin, the thing funding IPFS, certainly does :)
- dartos 3y ago
  Sure, but IPFS, the technology, doesn’t.
pclmulqdq 3y ago
IPFS is entwined with (and pretty much 100% backed by) Filecoin, which is a blockchain. Introducing a point of incompatibility would be a nonstarter.
- rglullis 3y ago
  Nothing is "entwined". I can download kubo and run it without even knowing what Filecoin is. In fact, every user of Brave browser does it. Same thing for projects like OrbitDB. Same thing for customers of Pinata.
  - pclmulqdq 3y ago
    I can download F2FS and run it on my RAM. That doesn't mean that F2FS isn't entwined with NVMe SSDs. In fact, while F2FS is a ludicrous example, this happens regularly with filesystems. The core design of filesystems is still built assuming that a block device will be behind it. IPFS is the same way, just s/block device/blockchain/.
    - rglullis 3y ago
      I'm sorry, I really have no idea where you are trying to go with this. - You can have files on IPFS and no blockchain whatsoever "behind it". - IPFS itself makes no use of blockchains as an abstration for data storage or file organization - If all the blockchains networks and nodes disappeared overnight, no IPFS nodes would be affected. I don't know if you actually used any of that or just going by hearsay.

simpsond 3y ago

ACLs are compatible with some blockchains. Token gating, merkle proofs, and RBAC are fairly common in smart contracts. See: https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/2.x/access-control#role-based-access-control https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/2.x/access-control#r...

pclmulqdq 3y ago
In terms of interacting with smart contracts, yes. In terms of accessing data, no. All data on a blockchain is public and immutable, and that's the point.

unicornmama 3y ago

But nginx HTTP bridge with copyright banlist is OK…

fulladder 3y ago

IPFS does not in any way involve a blockchain. There's a separate "layer on top of IPFS" called Filecoin that does involve a blockchain. (From a technical point of view, it's not really a layer on top, more of a re-implementation of IPFS with a blockchain.) I've worked on IPFS and know many of the key people at PL. They really are not blockchain people or cryptobros. They are much different from anyone else in crypto I have encountered. But ultimately they have to fund their activities somehow, and this is the reality of where the business potential is in P2P circa mid-2020s.