nsecbunker has never worked when I have tried it. and I've tried it a good 20 times. maybe I'm dumb.
Discussion
You are far from dumb Williams.
Noob. Obviously know nothing about nostr
Might be a combination of buggy implementations, poor connections, rate limiting. Doesn’t seem like it would be reliable unless im using a dedicated relay for it
finally got it working with nak + chachi.chat, didn't work initially but now it does.. alrighty.
yeah, I started running a relay specifically for it because most relays kicked me out or would not reliably relay ephemeral events for some reason
these ephemeral events are voodoo.. when testing nwc i could swear that using a basic nak --stream for the type doesnt always show the events. but i have a really hard time confirming the client actually tried to send it (vs. sent somewhere else). and it doesnt always happen.. 🤔
could be bug? 🐛 strfry 1.0+
also, confirmed bug with strfry 0.9.x cpu race condition on ephemeral event expiration prob doesnt help.
Could be a bug in the relay but if you are testing in a web browser if you minimize it or change tabs the relay will disconnect and once you open the browser again it will connect again, if the client didn't implement anything to send requests to the relay again after this it will never get the bunker response
That's one of the reasons why relays should store the ephemeral events for some minutes and not just send it to the active subscriptions
Maybe i'm dumber for trying it once more than you did. *sigh*
The Amber implementation of it has worked quite well for me.
That said, I have no idea what it's doing under the hood...
i didn't think amber was nsecbunker
It offers adding new connections like this:
And then it uses specific relays. Standard is relay.nsec.app
bizarre it would need to do this, I thought signing stayed on device? why does it need to go to the internet and back just to sign?
🤷♂️
nostr:nprofile1qqs827g8dkd07zjvlhh60csytujgd3l9mz7x807xk3fewge7rwlukxgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszrnhwden5te0dehhxtnvdakz7auvdel nostr:nprofile1qqs04xzt6ldm9qhs0ctw0t58kf4z57umjzmjg6jywu0seadwtqqc75spz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz9mhwden5te0wfjkccte9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wshszxnhwden5te0wpuhyctdd9jzuenfv96x5ctx9e3k7mf0dv4ph5
Maybe just to provide another option for apps that expect this kind of signing?
Amber can do entirely local signing using NIP-55, but it also supports remote signing via NIP-46. It uses relays to transfer the unsigned data to Amber, then the data is signed locally and transferred back to the client via relays. The relays used can be selected by the user and can even use a local relay, such as Citrine.
That said, even using Amber for NIP-46 signing has been spotty for me. Not sure why. It is using a similar concept as Nostr Wallet Connect, which has always worked quite well, but remote signing often just fails for some reason.
You know, acknowledging it is the first step. 😬😅
Nope. Not once.
A while back I heard someone say that there was a start9 package for it. But I can’t find it
nostr:nprofile1qqswacu3amp428kj8wtpqf77yd2upukcn2ft4aycmxm5scmh359e0ssppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uvt9vcv on nostr:nprofile1qqs9g69ua6m5ec6ukstnmnyewj7a4j0gjjn5hu75f7w23d64gczunmgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43qz9thwden5te0v35hgar09ec82c30wfjkcctexf34p3, works like a charm.
It’s a really bad UX. The local signer app like Amber seems better in every way. Need one of those on iOS….
can't really do it on iOS
but ironically what CAN be done is using amber on a separate android device as the nsecbunker for apps on ios
Amber on mobile to sign desktop applications is really underrated. For this reason when I redesigned Amber I gave more visibility to the "Add bunker" action.
nowser coulb be the bunker
The general concept of remote signers or nsecbunker in specific?