Among the blockchain-based decentralized storage solutions, IPFS+Filecoin is currently the most popular project. However, this field is still a vast blue ocean. Even for Filecoin, the main network has not yet been officially launched, and we have not yet been able to witness the operation of the complete system of IPFS+Filecoin.

In such a vast world, IPFS+Filecoin is neither the first project to emerge nor the last project to appear. The competition in this field is extremely fierce, and there are many active domestic teams among these competitors. Today we will share with you two famous decentralized storage projects in China: LAMBDA, YOTTA and their similarities and differences with IPFS+Filecoin.

1. Similarities and differences between LAMBDA and IPFS+Filecoin

The entire system of LAMBDA is divided into two networks: one is the consensus network and the other is the storage network. In these two networks, the storage network actually provides storage functions; the consensus network is a blockchain network that records transactions and storage information in the network.

This system structure is very similar to IPFS+Filecoin. The storage network in LAMBDA is similar to the IPFS system, and the consensus network is similar to the Filecoin system.

The proof of data validity in the LAMBDA system defines two indicators, one is space-time proof, and the other is data validity (PDP) proof.

In Filecoin's proof of data validity, space-time proof is also used. In addition, proof of data possession (PDP), proof of retrievability (PoRet) and proof of replication (PoRep) are also defined.

Filecoin's data possession certificate and retrieval certificate are to prove that the data stored in the system is indeed the data required by the user, and the copy certificate added on this basis is to prevent Sybil attacks and external source attacks.

Comparing the different indicators in the two systems, we found that from the white paper of LAMBDA, it is difficult to judge whether its data validity proof is equivalent to Filecoin's data possession proof and retrieval proof, and it is also difficult to judge the data validity proof Whether it can resist Sybil attack and external source attack to achieve the effect of copy proof in Filecoin.

Therefore, we believe that the technical details of the LAMBDA system are still lacking in polishing and elaboration.

2. Similarities and differences between Yotta and IPFS+Filecoin

The biggest highlight of the Yotta project is the founder of the team, Donglin Wang. From the description of his resume, he has deep attainments in the fields of cryptography and storage and has achieved high achievements. Therefore, this project highlights its own advantages in terms of technology.

Yotta highlighted the deficiencies of IPFS+Filecoin in the following technical areas:

1) The IPFS system does not address the security issues of stored data

The so-called security issue here means that in IPFS, anyone can get the file and see the file as long as they get the hash value of the stored file. Therefore, in IPFS, users have to encrypt and upload files by themselves to ensure that their content is not exposed.

2) The IPFS system does not solve the problem of data reliability

This means that the IPFS system lacks an incentive layer to ensure that data can have sufficient backups stored in the system, and lack of backups may lead to data loss.

3) The IPFS+Filecoin system does not solve the problem of service reliability

This means that the Filecoin system uses a unified algorithm to motivate nodes, which will cause certain nodes to affect the performance of the entire system due to insufficient network conditions and computing power.

YOTTA highlights its own advantages in the field of cryptography, emphasizing that the project can simultaneously solve the problem of file deduplication storage and encryption.

Here's how I see it:

Regarding the first deficiency, I think it is a deficiency of IPFS, but this is not a fatal problem. Users can encrypt data by themselves, or add a mechanism to encrypt data in the system in the future.

For the second shortcoming, this is precisely the reason why IPFS needs an incentive layer. Because there is no incentive layer, it is difficult to obtain data storage reliability only by relying on IPFS alone. The incentive layer of Filecoin must be added to ensure sufficient incentives to ensure that data has sufficient backups in the system and can be stored for a long enough time.

Regarding the third shortcoming, I am afraid that this is a problem that is not easy to solve at present. In the Filecoin system, if some nodes are unable to provide reliable services due to network conditions and computing power, the consequence is either that it is difficult to get rewards, or they may be punished by the system.

As far as the current situation is concerned, this shortcoming exists in many digital currency mining, such as Bitcoin, even Ethereum 2.0, which has high expectations in the industry. This is the threshold set by the system in order to establish a stable mining mechanism. Only with this threshold can the security of the system be guaranteed. This threshold will naturally eliminate those unqualified nodes.

For YOTTA's emphasis on its own unique solution in terms of deduplication and encryption, I think it needs to be tested by time.

3. Comprehensive evaluation

Overall, from the perspective of the white paper, Yotta directly proposed his own solution to the weaknesses of IPFS, which is technically more delicate than LAMBDA, but it is not too early to draw conclusions on whether it can challenge IPFS+Filecoin.

But whether it is LAMBDA or YOTTA, whether they can really achieve the performance and features described in the white paper in the usage scenario remains to be tested by time.

The IPFS+Filecoin system is not perfect. At present, only IPFS has landed, and the Filecoin main network has not yet been launched, and the entire system has not been able to show the most complete status and performance. But only the IPFS system among them has achieved quite good results in many years of practice, and has been widely used by many centralized APPs and decentralized DAPPs, and has established a good reputation in the industry. With such a foundation, when the Filecoin mainnet is launched, its performance will definitely be stronger than it is now, and it will inevitably attract higher attention and attention in the industry.

So overall I still think that LAMBDA and YOTTA still have a long way to go to challenge IPFS+Filecoin.