I would like to give an update on "federation" on Bluesky.
-
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose this would depend entirely on how did:plc and did:kad are defined as did methods. the "eepire" part of plc is cryptographically generated from the did creation request: https://web.plc.directory/spec/v0.1/did-plc
you sign the operation then hash it then truncate to first 24 characters
thus any did method that generates the same 24 character id is just an exact clone of plc
@trwnh @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose I am proposing inventing a did:kad, or a did:kad2 if did:kad is already being used, and giving it whatever properties would be needed to make it work the way I said.
And yes, I'm proposing creating an exact clone of plc that doesn't depend on plc.directory.
-
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose this would depend entirely on how did:plc and did:kad are defined as did methods. the "eepire" part of plc is cryptographically generated from the did creation request: https://web.plc.directory/spec/v0.1/did-plc
you sign the operation then hash it then truncate to first 24 characters
thus any did method that generates the same 24 character id is just an exact clone of plc
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose right now the practical consideration for migration is one of the following:
- you have a did:plc and want to migrate to did:web
- you have a did:web and want to migrate to another did:web
- you have a did:web and want to migrate to did:plcnone of the three are currently possible, you will lose all your follow relations etc even if you replicate the exact same content or serve the exact same data repo
-
@trwnh @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose I am proposing inventing a did:kad, or a did:kad2 if did:kad is already being used, and giving it whatever properties would be needed to make it work the way I said.
And yes, I'm proposing creating an exact clone of plc that doesn't depend on plc.directory.
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose i think this effectively amounts to "just use a dht that everyone agrees on"
-
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose i think this effectively amounts to "just use a dht that everyone agrees on"
@trwnh yes, that's why in my example I picked the first three letters of "kademlia"
-
@trwnh yes, that's why in my example I picked the first three letters of "kademlia"
@mcc ah, i missed that part ^^;
-
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose i think this effectively amounts to "just use a dht that everyone agrees on"
@trwnh @mcc @ikuturso @jrose In
did:plc:foo, foo is abase32(sha256(creation_request))[0:20]so its a 120-bit hash. I’m not confident of that’s long term securityAlso the
did:plcupdate metadata protocol is fundamentally dependent upon the existence of a central trusted system so you can’t just easily replicate it as a DHT system -
@trwnh @mcc @ikuturso @jrose In
did:plc:foo, foo is abase32(sha256(creation_request))[0:20]so its a 120-bit hash. I’m not confident of that’s long term securityAlso the
did:plcupdate metadata protocol is fundamentally dependent upon the existence of a central trusted system so you can’t just easily replicate it as a DHT system@erincandescent @ikuturso @mcc @jrose i think you could replace it with signed updates but in doing so, you've basically just wrapped around to needing a pki
-
@erincandescent @ikuturso @mcc @jrose i think you could replace it with signed updates but in doing so, you've basically just wrapped around to needing a pki
@trwnh @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose this raises an important question. Why the fuck are we not just using a pki to start with
-
@trwnh @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose this raises an important question. Why the fuck are we not just using a pki to start with
-
@trwnh @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose this raises an important question. Why the fuck are we not just using a pki to start with
@mcc @erincandescent @ikuturso @jrose uhhhh
"key management hard", basically
-
@erincandescent @ikuturso @mcc @jrose isn't plc basically custodial keys?
