2 ms·
Your system is so poorly secured there is no value in tampering with the message: I can just say I'm you and tweet. A tweet is not a direct message, it's a bro
by BoorishBears 3y ago
Your system is so poorly secured there is no value in tampering with the message: I can just say I'm you and tweet.
A tweet is not a direct message, it's a broadcast message.
Without a centralized 3rd party mapping names to public keys, the identity of the sender can be set to whatever you want.
Your model only works for non-tweets where I'm sending to people I had communication with in the past and was able to verify a public key... at which point you're just providing E2E encryption with worse ergonomics and no new value prop.
—
You cannot cheat the oracle problem. There is no magic bullet that lets you broadcast messages with known identifies without a centralized 3rd party.
- unboxingelf 3y agoThat’s not true. There are methods for proving control of a key, both in the protocol and outside. - Sharing keys in person - Sharing keys via other channels like Twitter - Via DNS using NIP-05
- BoorishBears 3y ago> A tweet is not a direct message, it's a broadcast message. > Without a centralized 3rd party mapping names to public keys Sharing in person doesn't work for broadcasting Other channels require falling back to some non-decentralized system. Again, it's the oracle problem. You can't say it's not true, that's like saying "1+1=2" is not true.