Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Alex Gleason (alex@gleasonator.com)'s status on Monday, 09-Oct-2023 14:39:53 JST Alex Gleason

   • fiatjaf
   • mikedilger
   @0962a7d6342862955d6b9bacb068bd7eb4a0aa88c052c7e7050a496c1d5ca915 @3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d @ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49 I don't see any obvious problems with this idea. What concerns me are the problems I don't see. At least following email structure is a safe bet. I think we'd have to prove a vuln with the current way to justify switching.
   
   But... there is actually more ambiguity with the current way than the proposed way, since alex_at_gleasonator.com is potentially a valid ActivityPub username.
   • Embed this notice
     Alex Gleason (alex@gleasonator.com)'s status on Monday, 09-Oct-2023 14:43:39 JST Alex Gleason

     in reply to

     • fiatjaf
     • mikedilger
     @0962a7d6342862955d6b9bacb068bd7eb4a0aa88c052c7e7050a496c1d5ca915 @3bf0c63fcb93463407af97a5e5ee64fa883d107ef9e558472c4eb9aaaefa459d @ee11a5dff40c19a555f41fe42b48f00e618c91225622ae37b6c2bb67b76c4e49 I bet most Nostr clients just do `const [localpart, domain] = nip05.split('@');` without properly checking or validating.