ZeroNet: The Web Without Servers

I’ve been exploring ZeroNet recently, a peer-to-peer web platform that’s been around since 2015 but still feels like a glimpse of what the internet could be. It’s not mainstream, and it’s not trying to be. But for anyone who cares about decentralisation and censorship-resistance, it’s worth understanding.

What It Is

ZeroNet is a decentralised network where websites exist without traditional servers. Instead of requesting a page from a server somewhere, your browser downloads it from other users who already have it. Think BitTorrent, but for websites. Once you’ve visited a site, you become a host for it too. The more people visit, the more resilient the site becomes.

There’s no company to take to court. No single point of failure. No domain registrar that can be pressured into pulling the plug.

How It Works

The technical bits are surprisingly elegant. ZeroNet uses Bitcoin cryptography for identity. Each site has a unique address derived from a public/private key pair. The site owner signs updates with their private key, and everyone can verify those signatures. This means content can be updated, but only by whoever holds the key. No passwords, no accounts, no centralised authentication.

Content is distributed using BitTorrent’s protocol. When you visit a ZeroNet site, you’re downloading it from peers and simultaneously seeding it to others. Sites are essentially signed archives that propagate across the network.

For privacy, ZeroNet can route traffic through Tor. It’s optional, but turning it on means your IP address isn’t visible to other peers. Combined with the fact that there’s no central server logging requests, the privacy properties are genuinely interesting.

Why I’m Interested

My interest in ZeroNet ties directly into my broader views on privacy. I’m not naive about the limitations of decentralised systems, or the fact that censorship resistance can protect content that probably shouldn’t be protected. But there’s something valuable in understanding how these networks function.

The centralised web has become remarkably fragile. A handful of companies control most of the infrastructure, and they’re increasingly subject to political and legal pressure. That’s sometimes appropriate. Nobody wants to defend genuinely harmful content. But the tools of control, once built, don’t stay confined to their intended purpose.

ZeroNet represents a different architecture entirely. It’s not about evading accountability, it’s about distributing it. Instead of trusting a company to host your content and hoping they don’t change their terms of service, you trust mathematics. The trade-offs are real: slower access, no search engines worth mentioning, and a user experience that assumes technical competence. But those are engineering problems, not fundamental limitations.

I’m not suggesting everyone should abandon the normal web for ZeroNet. That would be impractical and unnecessary. But understanding how decentralised alternatives work feels increasingly important. The architecture of the tools we use shapes what’s possible, and diversity in that architecture is probably healthy.

For now, I’m treating ZeroNet as an experiment. Something to explore and learn from rather than rely on. But in a world where digital infrastructure is more contested than ever, it’s useful to know that alternatives exist.

Thanks to ポテト for pointing me towards ZeroNet.