Hacker News Reader

IPFS isn't designed for private communications. It's designed for highly decentralized publishing of content. Safe, in this context, means the data is safe to "be".

View on HN

I understand that no one is going to tamper with the data. Everybody (who is running a full node) is gonna get what they ask for, but then they are gonna go and announce it to the world that they have it, and that worries me privacy-wise.

> that worries me privacy-wise

This should be addressed by the client, not the server. The server's function is to serve the data, not serve data and pretend it doesn't know who it gave it to.

Since IPFS is peer to peer, who is the server in this context?

Honestly I think the simplest and most effective method is to keep things as they are and have archive.org/.is keep backups of websites. A backup on archive.org is much more likely to stick around after 10 years than the users seeding a file.

Not if there is a government issued takedown notice it isn't.

IPFS has the same problems given a takedown notice[0]. Although you could continue serving the content and convince others to serve the content, any entity can take the next step and go after you.

[0]: https://github.com/ipfs/notes/issues/284

This also seems to be true in theory regarding torrents but not in practice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com