A good reason for groups to be sovereign (i.e., host their own relay)
Discussion
yeah, the need for closed zones of nostr network is very clear to me also for reasons like this
it's what i've had in my mind as what i want to do to build for nostr - build private communications networks that can comply with a business' confidentiality requirements... for example, even just private messaging your doctor... yeah... they won't be able to use that legally without opening up a can of worms... same for lawyer, at least, for any sensitive information
Yeah, never really saw the use case of private NIP-29 groups, when private relay groups are so much simpler and clearer in intention. Either I want something public, or I don't.
If I am concerned about privacy, my first thought wouldn't be to store anything at all, on anyone else's relay. Can't even confirm deletes, that way, or control who can watch the traffic.
I'd want my own relay, and to have encryption on top. And, if I were really serious, I'd put the relay on my own server, on a private network or behind Tor, or whatnot. I'd engage the entire architecture. Lock it, all the way down.
And running your own relay means that you also get to choose the relay software. Few.
Open ended moderation + automation tools ftw.
i'd also just add that any attitude that "omg too hard for normies" is complete bullshit because people have been doing this stuff since the days of BBSs, then UUNet nodes, and then there was IRC, then there was forums, it was after forums the spooks descended and tried to embrace, extend and extinguish that nasty free speech
also, just checking in on the slack for my paid gig, and it's snooping on me asking surveys, and i just want to point out that there is a definite tendency when people scale up internet service that it turns into a honeypot, and that is also highly contrary to the goal of private communication
being able to see people are talking because they are tracking the traffic volumes between addresses is one thing, but when you create government registered corps to run web services the spooks get even more information, because MiBs show up at the host company office with fancy pieces of paper and make classified requests that the host is not allowed to disclose to the users
Unfortunately, unless you’re a full time sysadmin that’s not even a very safe setup.
It’s also in no way a solution for people that don’t want to have to know how the sausage is made, they just want something that works.
If the relay uses AUTH, it's effective, regardless of where it is, or who runs it.
True, as long as it receives regular updates, and the hosting provider doesn't receive an NSL or equivalent, and you're not worth risking a 0day on.
That's just incorrect. You can auth to a relay but that doesn't mean anything about the content that the relay has access to then. It just means that other people can REQ the relay for content that they shouldn't have access to.
AUTH is never a replacement for encryption
💯💯💯
Honestly, the protocol has been going downhill for a while as people try to be as lazy as possible.
Relays instead of encryption. “Relays” that are shitty versions of normal APIs instead of DVMs. Relays instead of a proper community NIP.
No one is stopping you from writing a better community NIP.
I don't understand why it's not possible to have both.
We can, just stop calling it even remotely private.
It is private, if you run it on a relay most people don't have access to and you encrypt the content.
I'm failing to see how that can't be described as private. You don't even need to run that over the open Internet. You could use a VPN or put it behind a firewall, or whatnot. That's actually what VPNs are for, after all.
i am just bumping into this and forgot just how retarded some nostr devs are about signals intelligence... prime case in point right here
auth stops you from being able to send the message
the websockets are TLS encrypted already
in the case of DMs and application specific data the content SHOULD be encrypted by the protocol (don't tell hzrd149 about that though, he does ASD without encryption which is retarted)
It's simple logic, from where I'm looking. If you put the relay on a machine you manage, you can use all security built into Nostr AND all security that can be implemented on the machine. That is a second, powerful security layer.
encryption is never a replacement for not sending out a message either. basic sigint
realy already blocks access to DMs when auth is enabled, you can't do that without auth
the auth allows you to identify that the caller has the nsec that gives them the right to see sensitive events that contain their npub either as author or tagged, there's a set of event kinds that apply here, encrypted direct message, 1059, 1060 and i forget the application specific data kind, i think it's a 30k range parameterised replaceable, maybe 30002 or something
I also think SimpleX has its own reason to exist, and maybe Nostr should just offer a simple SimpleX handshake, rather than trying to replace it.
Nostr and SxC are two completely different types of systems. One doesn't replace the other. And there's no good way to integrate SxC with Nostr. They're just two completely different things.
basic systems administration is not that difficult
yep, this is really really fundamental principle of signals intelligence
if you don't want the enemy to intercept your signals, avoid sending them
use channels they can't intercept, don't store the data in a place where they can access it, etc etc...
unfortunately most nostr devs don't have a reasonable grounding in signals intelligence theory, even though they probably are familiar with alice and bob
someday, hosting your own group relay will be as easy as hosting your own gitea instance. 🌈
It already is.
Yes, absolutely. BUT... most users still won't do that.