thecookingsenpai

joined 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"Simple", they said

[–] [email protected] 49 points 9 months ago (10 children)

Thank you Roku, a step forward towards self hosting and self managing of every service

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

My account https://lemmy.world/u/thecookingsenpai is not the same as https://lemmy.ml/u/thecookingsenpai or any other instance. Thus, each account is bound to the instance it was created on, although it can interact with other instances

(aka if lemmy.today disappears you would have no account to log in with)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Woah, nope. Thanks, digging in it!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Thats so specific

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

That post tho

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Will add, you are totally right

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

True, I just wanted to be more generic before going technical (this is very vague from a tech point of view so i was testing how the idea could be reacted)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Will do, thanks! The main reason is to solve the following "problem": in a decentralized protocol like ActivityPub I (personally) find very weird that accounts are bound to a central instance. I have like 6 "thecookingsenpai" accounts across instances (I of course use only one of them but you get the idea) and if by disgrace lemmy.world collapses overnight I could not log in with my account elsewhere.

 

I have this proposal for ActivityPub

NOTE: This proposal is based on https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#authorization and https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/ActivityPub/Authentication_Authorization consulted on 06 January 2024.

  • Considering that the entire section on safety considerations is presented as non-normative
  • Given that "at the time of standardisation there are no strongly agreed mechanisms for authentication. " as per the above reference
  • Assuming that the ultimate goal is to have a decentralised, persistent and verifiable identity.

Premise: The following proposal represents a radical and potentially disruptive change to the current ActivityPub specifications. In particular the following parts:

  • ActivityPub clients authenticate to a server using OAuth 2.0 bearer tokens.
  • Related OAuth considerations

It is also important to note that the following proposal can coexist with current OAuth authentication.

The proposed encryption algorithm (ED25519) can and should be updated in the event of a vulnerability or major upgrade.

Suggestion

I have no idea how to write a document like this correctly, and I am probably doing it wrong, but my only goal is to stimulate discussion.

The proposal is as follows.

ActivityPub clients authenticate against a server using ED25519 signatures In general, bearer tokens can be easily replaced by signatures in almost every aspect. Advantages:

  • Servers don't need to store anything other than a session token.
  • Authentication is decentralised and context independent
  • Your key is your identity: no server breach can expose your data
  • There are mature libraries like node-forge (for nodeJS and TS) and many others that allow easy implementation of authentication.

I have tried to think about possible downsides, but the goal of this post is to stimulate discussion, please keep it respectful, but of course criticism and additions are welcome!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

You would be surprised in finding out that the majority of blockchains out there aren't Quantum resistant, tho (elliptic curves being the reason mainly but I am not an expert)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No pale idea, i hope it goes well for the dev but i think he is ok if he takes it down

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/10904853

cross-posted from: https://poptalk.scrubbles.tech/post/567593

Haier hits Home Assistant plugin dev with takedown notice

I'm not really big on "let's make a movement", but this independent dev has been hit with a cease-and-desist from making a FOSS Home Assistant addon for their Haier air conditioners.

Haier claims that they are losing out on millions of dollars due to this plugin which... lets you control their air conditions from home assistant. They haven't bothered to explain how that's possibly worth millions of dollars - they're just claiming it.

So of course they hit the Streisand button and are demanding that he takes it down. He of course is complying... in a couple of days. Maybe you see where this is going.

It would be an absolute shame if any of you just happened to create a fork, or clone the code, or mirror it in your own instance. An absolute shame.

Just so everyone here knows which repositories NOT to clone or fork, here are the two links:

and please, don't repost this anywhere, or share it in other communities, or anything like that. It's a shame that so many people already know and are making clones. I'm just letting you know so you don't do anything like telling others who may make their own copies.

(sidenote: Haier owns GE Appliance, so for our American folks it may affect you folks too)

view more: next ›