Are sting operations possible against IPFS→WWW gates?

From @Mithgol on Tue Sep 15 2015 12:27:44 GMT+0000 (UTC)

Imagine the following sting operation: an agent provocateur (or the ignorant public) uses ipfs add to publish some significant amount of illegal numbers that digitally represent child abuse images, racially charged hate speech, trade secrets, designer drug formulae, classified information such as elements of cyberwarfare, detailed instructions for producing weapons of mass destruction of nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological nature, etc.

The authorities are then greatly angered when each and every IPFS→WWW gate is repeatedly demonstrated to “voluntarily provide hosting in the Internet” for each and every piece of that illegal information.

A global witch hunt arises, gatemasters and developers around the globe are arrested, charged for posession and transmittion, treated as members of terrorist organizations, held without trial, tortured, raped, mutilated, their families and homes are officially or unoficcially targeted for air strikes by military-class unmanned combat drones and cruise missiles respectively.

(Or woundn’t they?)

Copied from original issue:

1 Like

Is this denylist secret?

I found and, but they didn’t have any actual DMCA notices or denylists. I can see some hashes on that display “Unavailable for Legal Reasons” but are available via ipfs get, so it’s obviously implemented.

Like this one? That is obviously a joke. :slight_smile:

No, there are some that are blocked by the gateway. - blocked
http://localhost:8080/ipfs/QmcvyefkqQX3PpjpY5L8B2yMd47XrVwAipr6cxUt2zvYU8/The.Big.Lebowski.mp4 - not blocked


Interesting. And now my node is popping up in the dht findprovs QmcvyefkqQX3PpjpY5L8B2yMd47XrVwAipr6cxUt2zvYU8 and ipfs dht findprovs QmbzpQmRULESivRvpP9SZL2vsu1dGkmczwVKCWzD2oXdMP results, even after repo gc. And I had localhost load it for only 1 or 2 seconds. :tada:

1 Like

Someone just create the gateway that ignores deny lists

Isnt this govt censorship then? exactly the same thing we are complaining over China, etc… about?

All of these “illegal” items are often perfectly legal in other countries

Even if there are blacklists (denylists), would they change per country to accommodate those countries rules? and if so, wouldnt they then just censor sites like FB, etc… like they currently are?

“IPFS networks can maintain lists of “bad bits/illegal numbers” that they will not download/serve/etc. These lists can be maintained per jurisdiction.”


"If people choose to opt out, and do not comply with the laws of their jurisdiction, that is their choice and thus are responsible for their action. "

Seems like law and order are not maintained in a coherant way if:

  1. Anyone can opt out of lists
  2. All lists are managed by people, subject to that persons decision to censor or not.