Centralized Internet vs Decentralized Internet

The beginnings of the Internet were based on different groups of people and organizations. These were isolated, self-contained networks that may or may not connect to other networks. Thus, control of different parts of the Internet was restricted to different people across groups. The Internet has grown at a rapid pace and is now fully centralized. Let’s learn about centralized internet versus decentralized internet and see why it has become so focused.

Central vs Decentralized Internet

decentralized internet They can be identified using peer-to-peer connections rather than accessing a single point network. The main difference between centralized and decentralized Internet is that the latter connects to different points (peers: other computers, printers, scanners, servers, etc.) without having to go through a mandatory point. There are no static network topologies here. In fact, none of the network structures you have learned so far belong to the decentralized Internet.


Come Central Internet, there is a mandatory central point (hardware). It is primarily server as in client server models. It can also be a hub or something through which all network data must pass. This model is an example of the current state of the Internet. You can find smaller networks within larger networks so that anyone who wants to spy on data can easily do so. For example, all data entering or leaving the United States must pass through certain servers. This makes it easy to audit and analyze data whenever the NSA or similar agencies want it.

In the decentralized model, the ISP can at most collect data from the network. In the current centralized model, since the data has to pass through certain points, any authorized person can inspect the data.

Why the central model of the Internet?

You now know that the main advantages of a central internet are government authorities that can spy on the common but mandatory points through which data must pass before reaching the recipients. You can conclude that policy makers have insisted on creating and promoting this model so that they can better control the Internet and its users. At its current size, a decentralized internet could mean something worse than TOR as data is virtually untraceable. I heard that security agencies have also come up with ways to decrypt data paths for TOR. The decentralized internet may have suffered the same fate as well, but why make it so complicated if some compulsions can be followed to control everything?

look at him WhatsApp communication application. It works best on the central form. If WhatsApp is decentralized, your message will jump up and down the network node and the recipient until the recipient is online. There is a high possibility that it will be corrupted and thus (data) lost. But because they use a centralized form, the message remains on the server until the recipient logs in. Whatsapp is just a small example of a huge network called the Internet.

The centralized model is useful for government authorities and also to reduce data loss. But there are groups that want decentralization and are protesting against the release of materials needed to improve freedom of expression. However, I believe that the decentralized model will create independently encrypted groups that will not be visible to others outside of those groups, which will make them unsafe for many. Already, antisocial elements use centralized models without much hassle thanks to proxies, encryption, and similar technologies. Although a decentralized internet provides more freedom, it will also make it very difficult to keep track of unhealthy activities.

svg %3E

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.