Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DIP-289 Permissioning of replies/respondents #289

Open
wesbiggs opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

DIP-289 Permissioning of replies/respondents #289

wesbiggs opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@wesbiggs
Copy link
Member

wesbiggs commented Oct 3, 2024

Abstract

Provide a facility for authors of a Broadcast to proactively moderate its Replies.

Each Broadcast is considered a permissioned space. This is necessary if user blocking (defined as preventing Bob from participating in Alice's threads) is allowed.

Proposal:

  • Each Broadcast Announcement contains an authorizationPublicKey property
  • Each Reply Announcement must include an authorizationSignature
  • If and only if the authorizationSignature is verified against a well-defined set of fields from the Reply, the Reply should be considered valid and shown in the thread.

This means that each time Bob wants to reply to a Broadcast from Alice, he must ask Alice, or her agent, for permission to do so. We therefore need to introduce a new concept into DSNP of an Authorization endpoint.

We propose that Alice can designate an Authorization endpoint. If Bob wants to post a reply, Bob must request an authorizationSignature from the endpoint. The authorization may be synchronous (an immediate approval or denial) or asynchronous (Alice wants to screen the replies, say).

(More detail to come here)

Questions:

  • Should permissioning also apply to Reaction Announcements in the thread?
  • Should permissioning also apply to reposting of the broadcast (work in progress; see separate DIP)? Reposting of replies?

Motivation

Answer the question of why? What problem does this solve? Who might care?

Specification Pull Request

Current change pull request:

Rationale

Why were the design choices made? What other solutions were rejected and why?

Backwards Compatibility

Any proposal that breaks compatibility with previous versions must describe how the change will be implemented and handle the migration period.

Reference Implementation and/or Tests

What could this look like implemented or what tests could be provided to assist in validation of implementations?

Security Considerations

Any change will effect the security of the system in some way. Describe the implications this DIP on security, both technical and human.

Dependencies

  • List of dependent DIPs if any.

References

Any references or other related links that might be helpful.

Copyright

Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.

@wesbiggs wesbiggs changed the title DIP-[Replace with Issue Number] Permissioning of replies/respondents DIP-289 Permissioning of replies/respondents Oct 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant