New Members: Start Here!

[digipl]

Thank for your analysis. You raise problems that have been addressed again and again in this forum. Some have a clear answer while others involve a permanent discussion and search for possible solutions. I would be delighted if someone with knowledge would analyze in depth aspects such as observable fingerprint and the way to mitigate these problems.

On the control of the network by an attacker you can read topics like these:

Analysing the google attack

This post follows on from the simulation in Explaining group splits and merges A ‘google attack’ is when a large company (such as google) owns a significant portion of the vaults on the network. This attack may have a few different effects: Control of consensus for sections Network disruption via churn during simultaneous exodus This post explores the first point, where consensus over sections can be exploited. The table below shows the results of a simulated google attack on a network of 1…

Network size and the cost benefit of an attack

There’s some crossover point in network size where an attack becomes unfeasible. A larger network means a) more attacking vaults are required so the cost is higher and b) less safecoin can be stolen per section so the benefit is less. [network_size_cost_benefit] The exact crossover point depends on exchange rates and costs and average vaults per section etc, but the result is that a larger network is generally more secure because it’s less desirable to attack. It’d be cool to have a tool tha…

Data Density Attack

Data Density Attack There’s an attack that is expensive but may cause serious and permanent problems to the network so it’s worth discussing and seeing what it’s about. Goal The goal of the attacker is to cause significant disruption to the network. There is no direct gain to the attacker. This makes the threat hopefully not too high. Description The crux of the problem is data on the network is expected to be evenly balanced across vault names and data names. Network operations like joinin…

Data Chains - Deeper Dive

Privacy and questionable content is a recurring theme:

A discussion on the Privacy of the SAFE Network

Hello everyone! I am currently in the midst of writing my dissertation for the SAFE Wiki project and in a small section I am discussing user privacy. The privacy of users is something that has been on my mind and I would like to start a discussion with you all to hear your insights and comments. As far as I understand it, user privacy is a feature of the network. Through Routing/Crust, the only nodes that ever receive your IP address are the Proxy Nodes. Deeper into the network, all vaults kno…

https://forum.autonomi.community/t/what-if-i-dont-want-to-store-child-porn/4306

How does SAFE stop censorship?

How exactly does SAFE Network stop or reduce censorship? Looking for ideas, thoughts and general discussion: I am writing a new article on this topic. Here is a good starter topic: Things That Would Not Have Happened On Safe

Question: Censorship by blacklisting hardcoded IPs?

I have a question regarding about the methods of censorships that governments might have. Okay, so rUDP will be indistinguishable from normal UDP packages, and there are no handshakes and ports are randomly assigned continuously. Perfect with that aspect, no DPI Firewall will block that based on traffic analysis. So I was wondering about the hardcoded IPs, that sounds like it would be the logical step for a gov: just keep updating the lists of hardcoded first hops. Lets say that gov servers ar…

Network Abuse Protections

So what are the suggestions to prevent abuse of the network for nefarious activity? I love the idea of Maidsafe, but I still feel like it will need some kind of user regulation in order to keep it tenable (and acceptable to governments)… Would there be a ‘jury duty’ type responsibility for users? In order to maintain your account, users picked at random would need to read -short- evidence relating to the deletion of files/sites on the network, and then agree/disagree to the deletion. Group con…

And sustainability concerns too:

Safenetwork sustainability concerns - Bandwidth has an ongoing cost however Safenetwork is a pay once, benefit forever model

EDIT: after a long discussion with several people, I’ve come up with a shorter and simpler way to summarise the concern: Basically my philosophy and argument simplified is this : it’s actually a valid^ deductive argument - (^I used “valid” in a technical sense, to only mean that IF the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. CRITICAL THINKING - Fundamentals: Deductive Arguments - YouTube Here’s a video you can watch to further understand what I mean. Anyway just to clarify, valid …

SAFE Storage economics - one-time fee, forever service

It is not rewritable storage, so when the person wants to store more they have to pay for the PUTs

Thoughts on the dangers of undeletable data?

So, now that my question about the possibility of data loss has been addressed, I would like to discuss the opposite concern. If data on this network is permanent, unable to be deleted even by the person who put it up, that’s potentially dangerous. Child porn, revenge porn, libel, personal details of unpopular public figures will all stay up forever. Sure, once the links are removed the content is as good as deleted, but if the links are attached to something valuable, like a social network, …