Speaking about only text notes.
Do you need to care about the trustability of a relay, if you can verify the content was created with the key you care about?
#asknostr
Login to reply
Replies (7)
nostr:nprofile1qqsr9cvzwc652r4m83d86ykplrnm9dg5gwdvzzn8ameanlvut35wy3gpzdmhxw309aex2mrp0yhx5c34x5hxxmmdqyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnvv9hxgpywa92
you don't need to trust relays if you verify the id and signature
I guess the only data they have is your request per ip, but not necessary know your npub.
Probably the only harm I see is data collection.
But direct harm, they cannot do, because you load no image or whatsoever, and you only accept data that comes from your trusted nos-fluencer.
But this means, you could in theory crawl relays, for finding traces for other relays, to discover content for your nos-fluencers.
So in theory, your nos-fluencer can disappear from big relays, but if you can discover new relays through your known relays, you could find content on a nos-web corner that you did not know existed, and does not have to care, because you only "load" or use notes whose npub you trust.
This is one of the major benefits of Nostr. Notes are all signed, so they are self-authenticating. You KNOW they have not been manipulated, regardless of what relay you found it on.
If you lose the feature of every event being signed, you reintroduce the need to trust that the server isn't altering data.
Signatures + decentralization is a nice combo.
I think we dont yet live upto its full potential.
Of course not.
And there are others who want to entirely abandon the idea of every event being signed by a private key.
Why? So we can have our social keys stored cold and also have key rotation, but no more self-authenticating events. Back to trusting the server. Oh, and you also lose censorship resistance via redundancy, since each public key only publishes to one server...