4 ms·

IMO the Tent design is going to become obsolete with the arrival of WebRTC. With WebRTC, there is not going to be any reason to have servers running, as long as

by sedachv 14y ago

IMO the Tent design is going to become obsolete with the arrival of WebRTC. With WebRTC, there is not going to be any reason to have servers running, as long as some of your friends are online. You can do everything by using public key cryptography and store-and-forward. You can authenticate with SRP/zero-knowledge password proofs. You don't need to have your private key with you, you can recover it from a quorum of your friends. Combine this with a public status/"who's online" server - could be any XMPP/web gateway for example - for bootstrapping the initial connection, and you can log in from any library/internet cafe computer. You can use broadcast encryption to address the privacy concerns of store-and-forward designs. I wrote a series of blog posts about how such a system would work: http://carcaddar.blogspot.ca/search/label/ClearSky http://carcaddar.blogspot.ca/search/label/ClearSky

eranation 14y ago
I feel so behind when reading comments like this, so behind that this could have been a sarcastic parody and I wouldn't even notice. Is there anyone who understood this comment fully? is this something any developer should know? I'm fighting the urge to Google every term (or read the blog) but I'll probably won't understand much of it. Can anyone translate this to plain English?
- sedachv 14y ago
  Understanding what modern cryptography techniques can do is worthwhile for every developer, because it enables entirely different kinds of system architectures. A good example is the Tahoe-LAFS distributed filesystem: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/FAQ https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/FAQ I included links to definitions and further information about all the terms used in that series of blog posts. I'm definitely not an expert on cryptography but I'll be happy to try to answer any questions.
wmf 14y ago
P2P (especially the cypherpunk wet dream that you're talking about) is at least 10x more complex than S2S architectures like Tent, which themselves are more complex than client-server aka Web 2.0. Also, server hosting has known business models while cypherpunks don't.
- sedachv 14y ago
  The proposal I put forward is far simpler than the kind of engineering that goes into making Facebook work. You're confusing novelty with complexity. There's nothing complex about taking some data, encrypting it, and sending it to another computer. P2P/F2F public-key cryptography networks have been around for about a decade (see Justin Frankel's WASTE http://waste.sourceforge.net/ http://waste.sourceforge.net/). Putting this together with some advancements into an unhosted browser app is not a huge leap. The problem isn't going to be the technical complexity, it is going to be the UI and slow upload speeds. The business model for this kind of network is going to be the same as the business model for BitTorrent - advertising on public directory web sites.
unixnoob 14y ago
Can we separate WebRTC functionality from a complex, bloated, insecure and unreliable web browser? (Assuming we ever get straddled with such a thing.) Can it be captured in a small, simple application?
- sedachv 14y ago
  If you don't care about the web browser, there is absolutely no need for WebRTC and everything is much simpler. Justin Frankel's WASTE (http://waste.sourceforge.net/ http://waste.sourceforge.net/) did everything you could want in a P2P social network (messaging, chat, file sharing) in 2003 (it obviously lacked a Facebook-like front end). The only thing it didn't have that my proposal does is broadcast encryption for "unfriending" people. WebRTC is cool because it will be in web browsers everywhere, and you'll have the "log in from the library computer" ability even for P2P networks, as long as there is a status web server you can bootstrap off of.
  - unixnoob 14y ago
    I did try out WASTE in 2003. It seemed more like a chat client than something I could run any application over. It was more an application for doing certain defined things accessible in menus (the ones you mentioned) instead of being a generic means to create peer-to-peer networks.
    - sedachv 14y ago
      If you want to do a different application, you can always take the WASTE code and do something else with it. Freenet is about as generic as P2P gets because it only handles storage. WebRTC should actually be a pretty good way to make P2P networks because you get a channel for sending data, doing realtime chat, audio/video codecs, all the HTML5 stuff for the UI, and JavaScript as a scripting language. As far as protocols and data standards go, I think the only reasonable thing is a protocol for status info, public key exchange, authentication, and listing the application protocols a peer supports. Everything else is too application-dependent.
icandoitbetter 14y ago
Why would you try to implement this with WebRTC? WebRTC is for real time communication. It's in the name. Social networks don't have to be real time. How would you do persistence in a WebRTC-run social network? E.g. how can I visit your profile when you're offline?
- sedachv 14y ago
  WebRTC is about direct peer-to-peer connections between web browsers. The real-time stuff refers to the video/audio codecs that come as part of the spec. Persistence is handled by storing-and-forwarding your profile information to your friends. Privacy is ensured by broadcast encryption. If you want people unconnected to your network to find you, you could publish public profile information on a directory server (this could also be the status server that's needed for bootstrapping a connection if you're logging in from a public computer at the library or wherever).

by sedachv 14y ago

eranation 14y ago

I feel so behind when reading comments like this, so behind that this could have been a sarcastic parody and I wouldn't even notice. Is there anyone who understood this comment fully? is this something any developer should know? I'm fighting the urge to Google every term (or read the blog) but I'll probably won't understand much of it. Can anyone translate this to plain English?

sedachv 14y ago
Understanding what modern cryptography techniques can do is worthwhile for every developer, because it enables entirely different kinds of system architectures. A good example is the Tahoe-LAFS distributed filesystem: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/FAQ https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/FAQ I included links to definitions and further information about all the terms used in that series of blog posts. I'm definitely not an expert on cryptography but I'll be happy to try to answer any questions.

wmf 14y ago

P2P (especially the cypherpunk wet dream that you're talking about) is at least 10x more complex than S2S architectures like Tent, which themselves are more complex than client-server aka Web 2.0. Also, server hosting has known business models while cypherpunks don't.

sedachv 14y ago
The proposal I put forward is far simpler than the kind of engineering that goes into making Facebook work. You're confusing novelty with complexity. There's nothing complex about taking some data, encrypting it, and sending it to another computer. P2P/F2F public-key cryptography networks have been around for about a decade (see Justin Frankel's WASTE http://waste.sourceforge.net/ http://waste.sourceforge.net/). Putting this together with some advancements into an unhosted browser app is not a huge leap. The problem isn't going to be the technical complexity, it is going to be the UI and slow upload speeds. The business model for this kind of network is going to be the same as the business model for BitTorrent - advertising on public directory web sites.

unixnoob 14y ago

Can we separate WebRTC functionality from a complex, bloated, insecure and unreliable web browser? (Assuming we ever get straddled with such a thing.) Can it be captured in a small, simple application?

sedachv 14y ago
If you don't care about the web browser, there is absolutely no need for WebRTC and everything is much simpler. Justin Frankel's WASTE (http://waste.sourceforge.net/ http://waste.sourceforge.net/) did everything you could want in a P2P social network (messaging, chat, file sharing) in 2003 (it obviously lacked a Facebook-like front end). The only thing it didn't have that my proposal does is broadcast encryption for "unfriending" people. WebRTC is cool because it will be in web browsers everywhere, and you'll have the "log in from the library computer" ability even for P2P networks, as long as there is a status web server you can bootstrap off of.
- unixnoob 14y ago
  I did try out WASTE in 2003. It seemed more like a chat client than something I could run any application over. It was more an application for doing certain defined things accessible in menus (the ones you mentioned) instead of being a generic means to create peer-to-peer networks.
  - sedachv 14y ago
    If you want to do a different application, you can always take the WASTE code and do something else with it. Freenet is about as generic as P2P gets because it only handles storage. WebRTC should actually be a pretty good way to make P2P networks because you get a channel for sending data, doing realtime chat, audio/video codecs, all the HTML5 stuff for the UI, and JavaScript as a scripting language. As far as protocols and data standards go, I think the only reasonable thing is a protocol for status info, public key exchange, authentication, and listing the application protocols a peer supports. Everything else is too application-dependent.

icandoitbetter 14y ago

Why would you try to implement this with WebRTC? WebRTC is for real time communication. It's in the name. Social networks don't have to be real time. How would you do persistence in a WebRTC-run social network? E.g. how can I visit your profile when you're offline?

sedachv 14y ago
WebRTC is about direct peer-to-peer connections between web browsers. The real-time stuff refers to the video/audio codecs that come as part of the spec. Persistence is handled by storing-and-forwarding your profile information to your friends. Privacy is ensured by broadcast encryption. If you want people unconnected to your network to find you, you could publish public profile information on a directory server (this could also be the status server that's needed for bootstrapping a connection if you're logging in from a public computer at the library or wherever).