diff --git a/blog/untrusted_the_issue_with_decentralisation.html b/blog/untrusted_the_issue_with_decentralisation.html index 531da58..640d35d 100644 --- a/blog/untrusted_the_issue_with_decentralisation.html +++ b/blog/untrusted_the_issue_with_decentralisation.html @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ - + @@ -34,19 +34,19 @@

Updated: 2022-10-29 (UTC+00:00)

-

Table of Contents

+

Table of Contents

-

Introduction

+

Introduction

A recent trend is seeing people move towards decentralised services and platforms. While this is reasonable and I can understand why they are doing such a thing, they are seemingly doing it without thinking about the possible consequences of doing so. The issue with decentralisation is trust; @@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ security issues with the decentralised model.

-

Examples

+

Examples

-

Messaging

+

Messaging

When it comes to messaging your contacts on a centralised platform, such as Twitter or Facebook, the keys are pinned to that user account, using the user's password as the method of identification. This approach makes it impossible to log in as a specific user without their password, should it be @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@

-

Solution

+

Solution

I'll cut to the chase; there isn't a definitive solution. The best way to handle this situation is to design your threat model and think about your reasoning for avoiding centralised platforms. Is it lack of trust of a specific company? Is it the possibility of centralised platforms going @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ form, decentralisation would make this impossible to implement in any form.

-

Conclusion

+

Conclusion

Do not demand anonymity; demand privacy and control of your own data. Complete anonymity makes it impossible to have a root of trust, and is typically never necessary. It is possible for someone else to hold your keys, without them taking control of them and dictating what you can and cannot do