3 ms·
Perfect, thanks. It seems to me these goals could be achieved while retaining browser compatibility. Just define a strict, automatically verifiable subset of t
by MaxBarraclough 7y ago
Perfect, thanks.
It seems to me these goals could be achieved while retaining browser compatibility. Just define a strict, automatically verifiable subset of the modern web stack. This could be privacy-friendly, and support easy implementation, while making it enormously more approachable, no?
How does their transport protocol stack up against HTTPS/TLS? Is there unnecessary complexity that can be avoided by reinventing the wheel here?
- brabel 7y agoI agree it would be nicer to have a subset of HTTP and HTML/CSS (not sure if JS could ever be made safe) but as cookies show, the simple fact that headers exist in HTTP and can be extended, makes it a privacy-problematic protocol from the start. The transport protocol used by Gemini is protected via TLS, just like HTTPS. It has the great advantage that the only way for a user to identify itself is by using mutual TLS, which is basically the only 100% secure way to do it (the fact that it's impossible to use mutual TLS on the web tells a lot about the incentives going on there). Gemini absolutely does not re-invent the wheel here.