NIP-17 was specifically designed to disallow any type of interference by relays. It was one of the main purposes of the spec that relays shall not be able to know anything about those wraps.
Discussion
makes sense. so, do you think clients can handle the spam/scam protection?
i believe they can go with nostr:nprofile1qqstq4j6pk2sgaupru6l7ah9nq0dueafq356jllwcy7uzlek9yx7hlspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ehx7um5wghxyctwvshs4kprv3.
NIP-17 as a vehicle for spam is very interesting. Any reputational metric requires to identify the sender/receiver, which is something that you don't want.
This is the ideal place for ecash I believe.
Clients should be able to file kind 1984 reports on the public wrap and you can then delete those wraps they reports.
Clients can also ask you to delete a wrap that was addressed to them on a regular kind:9 deletion request.
Hopefully over time we can build a client that simply helps users organize their inbox and delete stuff they don't need anymore.
so, based on our discussions, do you guys ok if a paid relay let any dm come to you? and you know this as a part of clients responsibility?
reacting to spam is not going to work in an hostile network.
An attacker could simply spam with NIP-17, and when it starts to get rejected he simply change the public wrap.
Yep... I have been the target of multiple spam attacks involving 1000s of messages and even DoS attacks with DMs. But none of that made a dent in my DM experience on Amethyst.
All attacks can be resolved from a client. None of them will ever be fully resolved by the relay.
You can even keep a client running that simply performs any WOT assessment after decrypting the DMs. But it is the client's role.
Yes, clients do play a role against DoS attacks against users.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7erfw36x7tnsw43z7un9d3shjqg4waehxw309a4x2mrv09nxjumg9ekxzmny9uqzp022u0n8u2vkf4y5zu3xrhz989wgna4a9em5vshrvcf8zuwlhq04jt7lhu I think was more concerned about DoS attacks against a relay
