Interesting. Never thought that someone came with the idea of integrating the i2p network within the Bitcoin Blockchain. The i2p network is much more complicated than the Tor network itself. If the developer would've continued working on this i2p-based implementation of Bitcoin, the project would've been successful in the long run. But I guess that there are other more important things to work on, in order to make the Bitcoin Blockchain a better place. Scalability seems to be the biggest concern of developers nowadays. With the Lightning Network, anything is possible. This layer-two solution for scaling Bitcoin also provides privacy to its users. No LN transactions can be tracked on a block explorer, unlike transactions performed on the main chain.
Using Tor + VPN with the Bitcoin Blockchain, may be all we need to achieve a strong degree of privacy. The i2p feature is something optional and not entirely necessary these days to achieve anonymity using the Bitcoin Blockchain. Besides, with privacy coins like Monero and Grin, who cares about full-fledged privacy on Bitcoin?
It won't be as simple as setting up Tor. I2P is inherently an internal-only network, i.e. it doesn't have protocol built-in outpoints with which to access the regular DNS resolved internet (or even accessing regular IP addresses outside of the I2P network). So you would need to explicity configure your Bitcoin node's machine to relay with Bitcoin nodes on the regular internet too, otherwise you'll suffer extraordinary risk of all sorts of sybil/partitioning attacks (which is already the case with Bitcoin over Tor). That would be quite a setup, and, really, the safest way to do that is running the Bitcoin node that's on the regular internet yourself, so even more of a setup. This comes with anonymity trade-offs almost certainly, but the alternative is an unacceptable risk to your node's awareness of the current valid chain.
Yes. I've figured this out when doing an in-depth analysis of the i2p network. It's much more complex than the Tor network itself. It's better off for Bitcoin to stay as is, since adding more complex features might "ruin" it. One thing for sure, is that no privacy technique is perfect. No one can achieve 100% anonymity by using alternative networks like Tor or i2p. The level of anonymity a user will get depends on his/her knowledge. Sometimes, carelessness of a user tends to expose his/her identity to the outside world. In networks like Tor or i2p, its important to be extremely careful by following the necessary security precautions in order to remain as anonymous as possible.
Bitcoin still works with the Tor network though, and it may be all we need to achieve some privacy across the Blockchain. If it were me, I'd use Tor + VPN alongside Bitcoin mixers to achieve a high level of privacy across the Blockchain. Better yet, privacy coins like Monero and Grin enforce anonymity techniques by default making our lives much easier.
But who knows? Maybe some developer becomes interested in making a cryptocurrency based off the i2p network a reality again. With enough tests, it could be possible to use this alternative network for Blockchain communications in case the Tor network becomes compromised sometime in the future. Until then, there are other more important things to take care about.
Yeah, I don't know about that altogether. When you read descriptions of I2P's architecture/protocol, it sounds great. I have never been enthusiastic about the implementation of that design however.
Two implementations of I2P exist; the original is written in Java (which is a huge no when it comes to security), and the C++ implementation is written (seemingly) exclusively by people who are writing in the cyrilic alphabet (so Ukrainian or something). So it seems a little opaque (despite open source code, I'd still prefer to be able to understand the chatter going on around it).
I am kind of enthusiastic about I2P, it does sound like a good direction as a model for an anonymous overlay for the internet (certainly an evolution of Tor's concept). But I'm also a little cautious about the compromises. But if everyone started using it tomorrow, I also wouldn't be complaining.
Honestly, I didn't know the security tradeoffs using Java on top of C++. Considering that i2p is mostly focused on its Java source code, its resilience against external attacks should be questioned. Anyways, it's good know about the vulnerabilities of the i2p network. Its open-source model may lead to someone making a better and improved version of i2p sometime in the future. We already have the C++ code, but I believe that it needs more work. It's no secret that the Tor network has far better support than i2p. I guess that's the reason why developers decided to work more on implementing Tor for the Bitcoin blockchain instead of i2p.
Still, any developer can design a new cryptocurrency (or work on an existent one) that would make use of the i2p network. It takes time, effort, and several tests to get the job done. With enough funding, the project could succeed in the long run. But as I've said before, there might be other important things to focus than just privacy/anonymity. If Bitcoin wants to gain the approval of worldwide governments, it would need to stay as transparent as possible. This explains why developers have been focusing on scalability and decentralization above privacy/anonymity. All in all, the adoption of i2p would be something that could increase the level of privacy among Bitcoin users worldwide.
