Crawler coverage and resilience
Can an application-layer crawler find and keep up with I2P hidden services, and how much does it miss?
- Crawled
- 1,400 eepsites
- Extracted
- 366,304 hyperlinks
- Data
- IEEE DataPort, DOI
PhD Research · University of Cincinnati
How do I2P eepsites link to each other, how fast do they appear and disappear, and do the answers hold on Tor and Freenet? I answer these with application-layer crawling and a directed multiplex graph that joins network-layer and application-layer views of the same network.
Can an application-layer crawler find and keep up with I2P hidden services, and how much does it miss?
How quickly do eepsites appear, vanish and rewire, and what does that say about the ecosystem’s stability?
Do the same collection methods and graph findings carry over to other anonymity networks?

Fig. 01. This is an illustrative eepsite relationship graph, not Study 1 data. It shows clusters, hubs, and isolated sites in a hidden-service ecosystem.
Application-layer crawling of eepsites, with coverage checked against a validation set.
A directed multiplex graph joins application-layer hyperlinks with network-layer relationships between the same sites.
Datasets go to IEEE DataPort and code to GitHub, so results can be checked and rerun.
Research ethics. This work measures structure, not people. It does not identify or attribute real-world actors, and operational details that could aid abuse are left out of public write-ups.
IEEE Intl. Conf. on Smart Data 2026 · Last author
IEEE iThings 2026 · Second author
Lab Build
The isolated analysis environment behind the investigations, written up so others can build it.