pull down to refresh

Digital signatures to prevent name squatting on SN?
153 sats \ 28 comments \ @ek 3 Oct 2022 bitcoin
Is there any opinion on how name squatting should be dealt with, if at all?
I used the search but nothing came up which was about this so I don't think this was already discussed somewhere (even though this seems odd).
I could come up with a few celebrities which aren't here yet (I am not going to name them to prevent name squatting) and I am not sure people will realize that these aren't the "real" ones.
I know that a verification like on Twitter could be controversial since it's centralized (most likely, I haven't looked this up).
Example solution: Digital signatures.
They could post the public key on a website they control (personal website etc.). Then, with the private key, they are signing a message and adding this message to their profile together with a link to their website. Now, everyone can verify themselves that they are indeed the ones they are saying they are.
Are there other decentralized solutions which require minimum trust?
write
preview
related posts
266 sats \ 22 replies \ @Brunswick 3 Oct 2022
This is another step in a cat and mouse game and only adds friction for most people. I dont think there are any digital identity verification schemes available that aren't centralized or government sponsored. SN itself is a place where you can build a digital reputation much like ebay and articles can be rated on that and the downvoting and upvoting scheme the site is built on. There is allot of potential to make this reputation score more useful as k00b develops more use cases for this value-exchange based platform. This is arguably better than an identity verification scheme because you can put as much energy into your anonymous identity as you want and it doesen't need to be tied to your physical identity.
reply
0 sats \ 18 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
I dont think there are any digital identity verification schemes available that aren't centralized or government sponsored.
Didn't I just name one? Also, bitcoin is literally based on digital signatures.
only adds friction for most people.
You don't have to verify yourself or other people. This would only be optional, so for most people on here, nothing would change.
I think it would be cool to be able to verify @DarthCoin, @HODL, ...
reply
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @HODL 3 Oct 2022
I just verified myself in the mirror. Yup it's me.
Now, whoever you think I am, I'm not that HODL. I'm a completely different person, living on a different continent. Should the other HODL want this username, we'll have to settle in sats. Anything below ₿6.15 won't be considered. Good luck!
reply
11 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Interesting. I guess in some sense, you are right. It doesn't really matter who you are or who I think who you are.
reply
25 sats \ 1 reply \ @HODL 3 Oct 2022
That's correct, it doesn't. Like it doesn't matter who Satoshi is. We all are a part of this community and what we do here is more important than what our username says.
Will there be some scammers, claiming they're Elon, doing the good ol' "double your coin"? Sure. Will the victims of the scam ever check their digital signature? Never.
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Will there be some scammers, claiming they're Elon, doing the good ol' "double your coin"? Sure. Will the victims of the scam ever check their digital signature? Never.
I see. Will have to think about that. Thanks for explaining.
I guess this goes into one of the direction bitcoin goes: Teaching people to be self-responsible
reply
22 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 3 Oct 2022
verify your mother if you want to verify
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Actually, you got me thinking: How would I verify my mother?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
lmao, this is verification enough
reply
0 sats \ 10 replies \ @Brunswick 3 Oct 2022
So to verify yourself and get access to the site you need to know how to manage a digital key and host your own website? Maybe in the case of a celebrity, but who's to arbitrate whether that celebrity is the rightful claimant of the nym?
reply
0 sats \ 9 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
No. Sorry, I updated my comment too late. It should be optional (I thought this is obvious)
reply
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @Brunswick 3 Oct 2022
Yes I'm misreading your question also, I forget it's a name staking scheme. But nonetheless, who's to certify the website and certificate corresponds to the person?
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Well, that's a good question. There is always a slight chance of being fooled.
But I would say SSL certificates improved internet security a lot.
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @Brunswick 3 Oct 2022
Do you mean EV certificates? That is foundationally tied to comparing against government IDs and registrations.
Strangely, the state of Illinois created a government key server for exactly this problem, to tie physical identification to a digital certificate to aid in licensure and registrations through email and such. It wasn't very popular, though still in place.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
What are EV certificates? I mean SSL/TLS certificates. The ones Let's Encrypt is doing.
view replies
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @deleted231216 3 Oct 2022
deleted by author
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Okay, fair point. Didn't think of just using the bio if one thinks it's important to verify themselves.
But I was also just interested in the opinion of the community on that since I didn't find any discussion. Didn't know this would be so controversial, lol (using digital signatures)
But now I know, so the post did it's job I guess, haha
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Brunswick 3 Oct 2022
Digital keys are already used in SN's lightning login system, so there's little need to add another certificate so far as I can tell, it's really up to the admin to decide how to handle squatters at this stage, but I would be inclined to let the free market deal with it. Either the "celebrity" can buy it from the squatter or they can simply use a different but similar nym (like ReallyRealCelebrityMonster44).
It's possible that low-reputation accounts could be purged by an algorithm after a period of inactivity which would eventually reduce squatting.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
For better UX, SN could add a "verified" badge to a profile. But users would still be able to verify themselves if they don't trust SN admins (no offense @k00b, haha). Thus, SN could be held accountable; making "mistakes" less probable.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cameri 4 Oct 2022
Don't be late to Stacker News.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @nullama 3 Oct 2022
I usually just read the messages here, and barely glance at who wrote it.
To me the important thing is what's being said, not that much who said it.
Also, almost no one is "techie" enough to do those signatures, or verify them. Yes, it's easy, but almost no one knows how to do it anyway.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
almost no one is "techie" enough to do those signatures, or verify them. Yes, it's easy, but almost no one knows how to do it anyway.
The point was to have the option as in "optional".
But yes. I agree with:
I usually just read the messages here, and barely glance at who wrote it.
To me the important thing is what's being said, not that much who said it.
I was just worried about other people. But as the discussion in this post showed me, I don't have to. It's not my problem. And if there ever comes a time where it is important to verify someone, then I can still verify someone myself.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek OP 3 Oct 2022
Found a relevant tweet: https://nitter.net/stephanlivera/status/1569406409992802304
reply