`client` tag.
Bring it back? Make it prominent? ✊ nostr:note1ku0sulxaglljtec3mwz9nuwq2gly2lqaw3m84r4ms70m3hd85c7snrt27u
Discussion
Like!
I guess I’ve got a task to do then, start adding client: Nos to our posts and asking nostr:npub1uaajg6r8hfgh9c3vpzm2m5w8mcgynh5e0tf0um4q5dfpx8u6p6dqmj87z6 to come up with a design for where to display it. ;-D
I will add it to NDK and allow developers to set it if they so choose.
cc nostr:npub1f0v4ryys99lgeq55qc7503hu39703aahtup94u7dk8dtqfkjlwkstjyppp
Users should be able to disable this feature. I overhreard in a dark alley way: "User [redacted] uses buggy client [redacted]? Great. Now I can focus my attack on that client's bugs."
What should be configurable is really up to the app developer. Some apps are all about configuration, others pick settings and design for them.
Sure, that's fine. I'm just offering my opinion, not something I think should be part of the protocol.
I mean, it’s optional text that can be included in an event. I agree we shouldn’t put a nip in which says it’s required. I think this should be a clients MAY add “client”: “app name” to events. There’s no nip for it right now, which might be why some clients dropped it. But that’s easy enough to fix.
Yeah, the privacy implications are significant.
Such a targeted attack is meant to be possible through client fingerprinting, I don’t think making the client explicit (and yes, obviously configurable!) is too problematic
nack, it can be faked by any other client, thus making it useless and more importantly misleading.
Is that really a problem? Somebody wants to use their own custom client pretending to be using Damus? If you want to have android but want to pretend you’ve got an iPhone, more power to you. This is about casual discovery of nostr apps.
imagine you want to frame a client, just make a weird note and append the client tag, then have the dev debug nothing
You can currently do that by making a bad note and saying that you were using client X; it’s it a new attack vector
yes I see it as an attack vector so I don't find it valuable, flaunting what client you use is not appealing to me, and because it can be used as an attack, I would also disregard it to find bugs because like you said, if someone said he used your client, that should be enough if you trust them, no tag needed.. so is this only so clients can show off inside other clients? to spread the existence of more clients? what is the goal here?
I can’t say it better than nostr:npub1wmr34t36fy03m8hvgl96zl3znndyzyaqhwmwdtshwmtkg03fetaqhjg240 did so I’ll just point to it:
nostr:note1ku0sulxaglljtec3mwz9nuwq2gly2lqaw3m84r4ms70m3hd85c7snrt27u
Im not sure the client tag is the best solution to that case, maybe have that with a more user content thing instead of clients appending content to users notes
tags are not inside the content
I consider the whole event as user content, and don't like clients that generate garbage content (via a tag or whatever inside each and every event, or even weird proprietary shit inside kind-0) for not much gain other than the client business to the detriment of the unkown user that is too clueless to understand it's even happening...
but this might be a different battle and don't want to ruin everyone's party, so obviously you're all free to use whatever tag you want :)
you can already do that by just making a weird note and saying you posted it from whatever client
Devs won't go on bug hunting based on that, either there is a reproduceble issue with some details or there isn't.
I actually love this idea, it would amplify the reach of clients…
This would be good. Easier to track down bugs and quirks plus adds a little competitive spice.