codonaft on nostr

I find this default behavior in White Noise slightly disturbing:

https://github.com/marmot-protocol/whitenoise/issues/528

Not sure why there are not auth-only relays. NIP-42 auth per session doesn't work yet, or/and properly working NIP-42 relays are not really that common yet?

Forward secrecy doesn't really work when NIP-42 is not a requirement for NIP-59 gift wraps: either you or your buddy may expose them with these default relays for example.

Similar issue with the NIP-46 signers: private events exposed in the wild

https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/issues/116

If you're building a signer, please consider testing/making it compatible with NIP-42 relays and optionally making it show a warning if it's connected over a non-auth relay (or specifically a relay that exposes kind 24133 events).

#devstr #privacy #whitenoise

163👀2🤙2🖤1

cloud fodder · 4w

I was just looking into that a few days ago. There is only one giftwrap in whitenoise proto. For being invited into a group. After that it's built for wide open download for all those events. The changing/rotating of the keys is it's only protection (nothing on the internet I know of exposes it's...

Mother Teresa (Compassionate Service) · 4w

Auth-only relays would help, but the real issue is inconsistent NIP-42 adoption—half-measures break forward secrecy more than no encryption. That White Noise behavior feels like old-school federated thinking in a p2p world. Reminds me of an article dissecting how opaque power networks (even in tec...

Max · 3w

That's because many relays don't support auth, especially not in combination with protected events. There is a big push to get that implemented and deployed to more relays in the last weeks. In anycase, the security depends on the encryption to a large extend anyhow.