Concepts P2P social networks and Diaspora
P2P (Peer-to-Peer) is a technology for building computer networks where each computer is both a server and a client, and this technology also allows you to use shared resources (for example, files).
There are centralized (with one central server for managing the network), hybrid (where there are many such servers) and pure P2P networks (without servers at all). For communication between computers, various protocols are used and recently there has been an attempt to standardize them, and openness: JXTA and Gnutella are open standardized protocols. In centralized and hybrid networks, when a new computer is connected to a P2P network, it registers with the server and receives information about the network. In pure P2P networks, the computer connects to any computer previously connected to the network and receives information about it from the network. In classic P2P, designed to distribute various files, each computer is perceived by the network as an anonymous entity. Recently, some innovative projects have appeared with the aim of building a social network based on P2P technology.
For example:
LifeSocia l - Distributed Social Networking Platform
PeerSoN - Privacy-Preserving Social Networking on P2P
Safebook — Again Confidential Social Networks
Diaspora - Privacy (under personal control) open source_naya social network
Although these projects are based on common principles, namely, P2P architecture and data encryption, they motivate their appearance in different ways:
Developers LifeSocial pays attention to saving server content (according to Facebook
the user costs Facebook $ 0.5 per year, which, with the number of Facebook users, more than a billion users, gives a substantial amount).
PeerSoN and Safebook motivate users to fully control their data. (The user has full control over the data, since they are stored on the user's computer, and not on a shared server and are transmitted via the Internet not in the clear, but in encrypted form.)
')
Each of these projects has its own characteristics:
In LifeSocial , for example, a user can use the program to view profiles from the circle of "friends", even without Internet access. In order to achieve 99% availability of user data - this data is distributed on thousands of other computers on the network, and there they are stored in encrypted form. As well as for the search service LifeSocial and Safebook use DHT (Distributed Hash Table).
PeerSoN uses OpenDHT for a decentralized P2P search service to enable computers to find each other on the network. The search for new users in PeerSoN is organized in an interesting way, for example: searching for old school friends. How do the PeerSoN developers write: “A user profile consists of a number of files. Each file has some kind of user profile field, such as a name or birthday. The user determines access rights for each file, thereby determining the availability of this information to other users. So if one user wants him to be found at the request of "KSU", then a file will be created with the name "KSU" and thus you can find all users who studied at "KSU". This file will look like GUID @ filename (where GUID is the id of the network user, for example, there may be a hash from the email. Thus, if 2 files “14 @ KGU” and “123 @ KGU” are found, this means that users with id = 14 and id = 123 studied or have something to do with KSU.
A user profile is shown in Safebook as a nested doll - this is a user profile structure, which consists of different levels of computers where user data is stored, and in the center is a user's computer, which in turn can be at some level in another user’s Matrioshka. Those. You can get information about the user from any computer entering the matryoshka.
Diaspora is a relatively new project, based on the same principles, but the most important difference is that it is OpenSource. On September 15, 2010, version 1 of the program was published, and soon the developers made support for OAuth and integration with Twitter and Facebook.
Yet today's P2P solutions have disadvantages:
Low effective search.
Usability is inferior to the web social networks.
Data is not always available.
Data is not always relevant.
P.S. So, as the post - the first, please indicate to me all the errors.
P.P.S. Bibliography:
1. Doris Schiöberg. A Peer-to-Peer Infrastructure for Social Networks. Diplom Thesis, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany, Dezember 17, 2008.
2. Safebook: Leucio Antonio Cutillo, Refik Molva, Thorsten Strufe
The Third IEEE of WoWMoM Workshop on Autonomic and Opportunistic Communications, June 15, 2009, Kos, Grece.
3. Distributed Platform for Multimedia Communities, Kalman Graf fi f, Sergey Podrajanski, Patrick Mukherjee, Aleksandra Kovacevic, and Ralf Steinmetz.
PPPS Many thanks to the person who checked this post for an invite!
There are centralized (with one central server for managing the network), hybrid (where there are many such servers) and pure P2P networks (without servers at all). For communication between computers, various protocols are used and recently there has been an attempt to standardize them, and openness: JXTA and Gnutella are open standardized protocols. In centralized and hybrid networks, when a new computer is connected to a P2P network, it registers with the server and receives information about the network. In pure P2P networks, the computer connects to any computer previously connected to the network and receives information about it from the network. In classic P2P, designed to distribute various files, each computer is perceived by the network as an anonymous entity. Recently, some innovative projects have appeared with the aim of building a social network based on P2P technology.
For example:
LifeSocia l - Distributed Social Networking Platform
PeerSoN - Privacy-Preserving Social Networking on P2P
Safebook — Again Confidential Social Networks
Diaspora - Privacy (under personal control) open source_naya social network
Although these projects are based on common principles, namely, P2P architecture and data encryption, they motivate their appearance in different ways:
Developers LifeSocial pays attention to saving server content (according to Facebook
the user costs Facebook $ 0.5 per year, which, with the number of Facebook users, more than a billion users, gives a substantial amount).
PeerSoN and Safebook motivate users to fully control their data. (The user has full control over the data, since they are stored on the user's computer, and not on a shared server and are transmitted via the Internet not in the clear, but in encrypted form.)
')
Each of these projects has its own characteristics:
In LifeSocial , for example, a user can use the program to view profiles from the circle of "friends", even without Internet access. In order to achieve 99% availability of user data - this data is distributed on thousands of other computers on the network, and there they are stored in encrypted form. As well as for the search service LifeSocial and Safebook use DHT (Distributed Hash Table).
PeerSoN uses OpenDHT for a decentralized P2P search service to enable computers to find each other on the network. The search for new users in PeerSoN is organized in an interesting way, for example: searching for old school friends. How do the PeerSoN developers write: “A user profile consists of a number of files. Each file has some kind of user profile field, such as a name or birthday. The user determines access rights for each file, thereby determining the availability of this information to other users. So if one user wants him to be found at the request of "KSU", then a file will be created with the name "KSU" and thus you can find all users who studied at "KSU". This file will look like GUID @ filename (where GUID is the id of the network user, for example, there may be a hash from the email. Thus, if 2 files “14 @ KGU” and “123 @ KGU” are found, this means that users with id = 14 and id = 123 studied or have something to do with KSU.
A user profile is shown in Safebook as a nested doll - this is a user profile structure, which consists of different levels of computers where user data is stored, and in the center is a user's computer, which in turn can be at some level in another user’s Matrioshka. Those. You can get information about the user from any computer entering the matryoshka.
Diaspora is a relatively new project, based on the same principles, but the most important difference is that it is OpenSource. On September 15, 2010, version 1 of the program was published, and soon the developers made support for OAuth and integration with Twitter and Facebook.
Yet today's P2P solutions have disadvantages:
Low effective search.
Usability is inferior to the web social networks.
Data is not always available.
Data is not always relevant.
P.S. So, as the post - the first, please indicate to me all the errors.
P.P.S. Bibliography:
1. Doris Schiöberg. A Peer-to-Peer Infrastructure for Social Networks. Diplom Thesis, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany, Dezember 17, 2008.
2. Safebook: Leucio Antonio Cutillo, Refik Molva, Thorsten Strufe
The Third IEEE of WoWMoM Workshop on Autonomic and Opportunistic Communications, June 15, 2009, Kos, Grece.
3. Distributed Platform for Multimedia Communities, Kalman Graf fi f, Sergey Podrajanski, Patrick Mukherjee, Aleksandra Kovacevic, and Ralf Steinmetz.
PPPS Many thanks to the person who checked this post for an invite!
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/197434/
All Articles