A work may retain its files intact yet cease to exist for the public. It suffices for a domain to expire, an account to be closed, an API to change, or the service that rendered the content accessible to vanish. The dependency may reside in the path leading to the file.
A file does not contain its entire environment
A connected work may depend on a domain, DNS, account, hosting, database, API, certificates, storage, gateway, remote libraries, scheduled tasks, and a contract. Each element possesses its own proprietor, term, and recovery process.
IPFS identifies content; it does not guarantee its preservation
IPFS utilises CIDs derived from content. These allow for the identification and verification of retrieved data, yet they do not guarantee availability. Nodes may delete unpinned data. Pinning indicates that a node should retain the data, yet this remains dependent upon an infrastructure and an operator.
It is prudent to separate identity, integrity, and availability. The former two do not, of themselves, produce the third.
A gateway is not IPFS
A gateway permits the opening of IPFS content within a browser. If the URL incorporates a specific gateway, the experience remains tethered to that operator. Official documentation advises against hardcoding a specific gateway as a permanent solution.
Conifer: when preservation infrastructure ages
Rhizome announced on 18 December 2025 the progressive withdrawal of Conifer. From June 2026, it would cease to accept new captures, whilst existing collections would remain accessible and options for export or migration would be offered.
The case demonstrates that even a preservation tool may become a dependency. The transition contemplated WACZ files, ReplayWeb.page, workshops, and alternatives.
Closing correctly is also part of the infrastructure
Webrecorder highlighted prior notice, export in a portable format, self-hosting options, and the absence of transfers without consent. No service guarantees eternity; the difference lies in whether a documented exit exists.
Migration alters the record
Electronic Literature Lab had utilised Conifer alongside Ruffle for Flash works. The withdrawal necessitated the testing and relocation of content. Migration improved access continuity, yet it altered the preservation tool and, in certain instances, the necessary code.
Accounts and credentials are not public documentation
Works that depend on services require a private inventory. The public record may indicate that a credential exists, who is responsible, and where it is held; the secret must remain within another system.
It is also prudent to separate the artist's personal account from the operational account of the work.
The domain may form part of the work
A domain may be a replaceable access point or a recognisable part of the work. In both cases, it requires renewal, contact, payment, DNS, and transfer. No sufficient primary case of a work lost due to domain expiration has been identified; this should not be supplemented with anecdotes.
The question missing from many acquisitions
In addition to "where is the file?", it is prudent to ask which service maintains it, who controls the account, how data and metadata are exported, what occurs if the contract terminates, and what portion is lost upon migration.
What these cases do not demonstrate
They do not demonstrate that IPFS guarantees permanence, that a CID suffices for preservation, that self-hosting eliminates maintenance, or that every closure produces loss. They show that identification, storage, access, and interface are distinct layers.
To take action
The guide on what to do if a platform closes mandates export and testing. For web works, consult how to preserve a web work. For connected exhibition, consult how to exhibit a work dependent on the internet or an API.
About the open conversation
It remains unanswered which dependencies remain outside the inventory until an account, an API, a domain, a gateway or a service ceases to function. Which can be detected in advance and which only appear upon failure?
The cases examined, including that of Conifer, describe specific closures and recoveries. They do not allow one to conclude that all external infrastructure is unstable nor to estimate how long a service will last.
If you have experienced or documented a closure, a migration or a recovery, especially when the files continued to exist but access or functionality had disappeared, this notebook remains open: write to me.