4 ms·
I think they are mostly waiting for MaidSAFE to solve that problem, which is a group that's actually serious about the intricate technology that needs to go int
by tinkerrr 12y ago
I think they are mostly waiting for MaidSAFE to solve that problem, which is a group that's actually serious about the intricate technology that needs to go into this, and all the special cases (e.g. how many times do you need to replicate a chunk of data to make sure it isn't lost when people turn off their computers). See https://github.com/maidsafe https://github.com/maidsafe
- Taek 12y agoI've been mostly unimpressed with MaidSAFE approach to the storage problem. They (last I checked) are approaching the problem by using quadruple redundancy, no erasure coding. This opens some attack vectors, because an attacker only needs to control 4/4 pieces, something that takes a probability of (attacker control)^4 . Their proof of storage also seems to use nonce's, which require precomputation before uploading the file, and means a limited amount of proofs before you have to fetch the file and compute a bunch of other nonce's. The biggest problem with MaidSAFE's stuff is that it's all over the place. There's no concise document that explains proof-of-storage. Their approach seems enormously complex, which to me indicates a huge likelihood of undetected vulnerabilities (complexity is bad when you want security).