Hello, I’m Valmond creator of the Tenfingers sharing protocol & implementation.
To make it more motivating for people to try it out, what should I share to showcase its abilities? It can be rougly anything up to say a gigabyte.
I’m thinking about music, video, parts of wikipedia, …
Legal of course.
Any ideas greatly appreciated.
Cheers & thanks!
if I’m reading this right, it’s a bit like ipfs+dht. is this a content-addressable system?
anyway, you should probably have demos of
- large files (like a Linux disk image), to demonstrate consistency in transfer.
- Video stream, to demonstrate performance and low latency.
- multiple files shared with many peers at once, to demonstrate scalability
- sharing with low bandwidth and high latency, to demonstrate possible mobile use cases.
thoughts:
- the logo is very close to wireguard’s.
- if the data is stored on peers, that means there must always be people with free storage online for it to work? how much storage is needed? is that data in plaintext? could a bad actor push illegal content to peers without them knowing?
also, please convert the whitepaper to a format that is actually readable. rtf? really?
Thanks, good ideas and recommendations!
The data is overshared, so several nodes store your data (as you store theirs. The storage requirements are roughly your data size times the number of over shares. The number of overshares is confugurable on a per data basis), this makes the availability high.
The data is encrypted with AES 256 (CTR) so nodes do not know what they are storing.
It’s hard to invent new logos I guess, at least mine is blue and laying on the side…
It might feel like IPFS but the underlying tech is completely different, so it’s not a DHT but uses dynamic links, which means that you can update your shared data without the need to re distribute the link file.
Ha ha point taken, I’ll convert it to a better format.
i’m interested in the dynamic linking, what mechanism is used to stop situations like left-pad or the pypi incident where a file is removed replaced with a malicious alternative?
The idea is that nodes are trust-less, they do not know anything about the data.
An owner is authentified over an RSA handshake, so if the owner is not compromised, your request for updating a data will be rejected.
A malicous node though, must be both lucky (asked to share the data, so it can try to serve the malicious data) but also must have access to the link file so he can use the AES key to encrypt the bad data. This could happen if a malicious peron gets the hand on the link file, which sort of defeats the whole idea in the first place but it’s an attack vector for sure.
So back to the drawing board again.
The public RSA key of the owner is already in the link file, I think I can use it to authenticate the data (say the original user uses his private RSA to sign a hash of the data and adds it to the payload).
Very good feedback, I thought I had it all covered. It seems like I can make a secure fix but I’ll think a bit more about it first of course.
