> I'm not familiar with what cryptography Nostr uses here

We're currently trying to move away from [NIP04](https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/blob/master/04.md) which uses symmetric encryption with AES-256-CBC (absolute trash compared to industry standard) to [NIP44](https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/746). [NIP44 just got audited.](https://stacker.news/items/347871)

>  But like @ekzyis mentioned: there are famous examples with RSA where weaknesses emerge when using the same key for encryptions and signatures.

Thanks :)

But suppose you publish a Nostr pubkey and I encrypt a DM with it (no signatures). How is this unsecure?

I'm not familiar with what cryptography nostr uses here.

But in general it's not a good idea to encrypt data with just any pubkey. It could (doesn't have to) be insecure in a sense of your DM might be decipherable for 3rd parties. It can't be insecure in a sense of threatening the secret key of the recipient, of course.

I'm not familiar with what cryptography Nostr uses here. But like 

 mentioned: there are famous examples with RSA where weaknesses emerge when using the same key for encryptions and signatures.

[important] foreign asset control compliance

k00b

>  But suppose you publish a Nostr pubkey and I encrypt a DM with it (no signatures). How is this unsecure? 

I'm not familiar with what cryptography nostr uses here. 

But in general it's not a good idea to encrypt data with just any pubkey. It could (doesn't have to) be insecure in a sense of your DM might be decipherable for 3rd parties. It can't be insecure in a sense of threatening the secret key of the recipient, of course.

I'm not familiar with what cryptography Nostr uses here. But like @ekzyis mentioned: there are famous examples with RSA where weaknesses emerge when using the same key for encryptions and signatures.