Secure Scuttlebutt (SSB)

Have you looked into secure scuttlebutt (SSB)? I’ve been using Patchwork (the p2p social network) for over a year now and it looks good. Also using git-ssb/git-ssb-web (a decentralised git + github). It all works on top of SSB.

I’d definitely welcome a rust implementation of SSB!

Let me know if you want to hop into Patchwork and talk to the devs. I’m running a Pub and can invite you.

9 Likes

@Seneca?

2 Likes

Yes I have, there are some nice features there based on the strongly connected graph. I was just re-iterating this again on Friday. We already have the overlay so no need for the hash index part, but the assumptions and proofs look very promising to allow us to reduce connections in section and at the same time decrease the number of messages (we are currently over n^2 messages, which is way too much). Interesting this is the very project I asked the design guys to look more into for this very reason.

Cheers for the ping there, very helpful.

10 Likes

Scuttlebutt looks very interesting indeed. Off-grid, decentralised, no ISP, living on a boat :slight_smile: … what’s not to like with these guys.

Here’s a really good explainer. If anyone gets the Patchwork software and wants to connect let me know by PM. I’m gonna try it out now.

https://staltz.com/an-off-grid-social-network.html

@moderators maybe spin these posts off into a related projects topic for Scuttlebutt?

10 Likes

Ping me when you get there. I’m also @ktorn there.

4 Likes

Looks good! For me the gossip protocol is probably less interesting because in SAFE the peer-to-peer layer is abstracted away from the application layer; an app only sees a giant hash table of data. It’s of course possible to again implement a gossip protocol on top of that using the messaging system, but that’d be way too slow and expensive for most purposes I suppose.

From the perspective of the application layer I find it useful to look at SAFE as a reliable but dumb database. :smiley: Dumb because the user agent can’t ask it any complex requests, it has to piece everything together itself using many basic requests.
As things stand now in Project Decorum’s design user agents rarely directly message (not talking about personal messages here) each other; they just publish interesting data (from their perspecitve) in such a way that it’s easy for others to find it if they (are likely to) have a common interest. The user agent has to be pro-active if it wants to know anything, no other agent is going to directly tell it what’s what.
I suppose the more fundamental difference here is the strict separation in SAFE between vault and client functionality. Advantages are that a client can make do with very poor upload bandwidth and maybe has better privacy. A disadvantage is that the network probably uses more bandwidth in total (vaults are middlemen here, a detour). We’ll have to see how it’ll all turn out in practice, the only thing I know for sure is that it’s going to be fascinating to see it all evolve!

I certainly appreciate the principles and design of scuttlebutt, it strongly resonates with what we’re trying to accomplish here.

8 Likes

Yes, I see that now I’ve read a little! :blush: It strikes me that their kind of apps would be trivial to implement using SAFE as shared storage. One limitation that seems a real pain for them is that your identity is linked to your device - so you can only post from a single computer. That would disappear if their apps sat on SAFEnetwork.

2 Likes