Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

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.



That’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


> 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.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: