[kalmi10]

The thing I worry about with IPFS is privacy. If you use IPFS directly (as intended, not via a public gateway), and you visit a site, then you are automatically going to be seeding (like a torrent) the visited content, and thus you will be announcing/broadcasting the fact to the world that you (your node/your IP) have visited it. My current understanding is that this cannot really be avoided, since one needs to be able to find the nodes that have the content for any given hash.

[zelly]

IPFS really needs onion routing built-in. When I was reading this, I thought about running an IPFS node on my desktop but remembered it doesn't have onion routing built-in. So I'd have to run a proxy like torsocks and torify the IPFS server. Then I have to worry about all the ways that IP can leak from this. Then I have to figure out how to connect to other IPFS nodes through TOR. So forget it, I'll do it when I have time, which is the same thing I said the last time I thought about running an IPFS node.

[qqii]

At that point aren't you looking for Freenet/Zeronet?

[mirimir]

Well, one can use IPFS through Tor, and use gateways that are Tor onion services.

[tylersmith]

We do this for OpenBazaar which is built on top of ipfs and it works great. We built a Tor transport for libp2p, which is what drives ipfs's p2p networking so any libp2p app, including ipfs, can work over Tor.

https://github.com/OpenBazaar/go-onion-transport

[judge2020]

Obfuscating your IP doesn't solve the problem. If a malicious actor knew someone's info (such as address), they could give them an ipfs link with CP and report them.

[agumonkey]

there's something weirdly poetic of having information reborn through voluntary noise

[kalmi10]

Good point about the experimental Tor support and the Onion IPFS gateways.

Is there a reasonable way to use untrusted gateways while upholding the data integrity guarantees? I think it should be possible in theory.

[indigodaddy]

The other potential possibility/issue that I would be uncomfortable with, would be a bad actor visiting and then seeding my content. Say someone also seeding or just locally having child pornography or some other nefarious thing, and now they are also an aggregator for your non-nefarious content. Just the possibility of that type of potential unintended association gives me pause in terms of considering it for a blog or whatever else.

[indigodaddy]

I got a downvote so I guess people aren’t concerned about this or believe my concern not valid or naive?

[NortySpock]

Maybe a software delay where it only starts seeding 5 minutes later, or an opt-out button where you can avoid re-seeding if you don't like what you see.

[jtbayly]

Or perhaps better would be random seeding of additional content you didn’t view.

[kordlessagain]

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".

[kalmi10]

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.

[Polylactic_acid]

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.