-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 322
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
Support for anonymizing networks #184
Comments
It's too hard to get users for these networks, but if they exist and their computers have support for them, then I assume they will be able to use websockets and thus all Nostr capabilities through them, right? There is no need to change the protocol, just for people to run relays in these networks. I think https://relayable.org/ has a Tor address. |
I heard that browsers have limitations for websocket use without https. but I'm not sure about it.
Is it possible for relays to have several addresses right now? Also there is no sense to direct users to wrong addresses. |
Yes.
Yes. |
For what it's worth, StartOS is a self-hosting project I follow that has, as services, the nostr relay and nostrudel both of which it serves up over TOR. It's not a protocol-level fix, but I think it checks some boxes. 🤷♂️ |
I initially thought that such support require protocol changes. |
Censorship is able to target not only information, but also authors of such information.
If I understand correctly, nostr relays have access to IP addresses of users and can transfer this information to censors by their request.
Theoretically, this problem can be hackfixed by using nostr from Tor Browser.
But in practice, many relays are inaccessible from Tor exit nodes, which leads to poor user experience.
Better option is to have direct support for anonymizing networks.
These 3 options may be compatible with web technologies used in nostr:
It should be possible to have different addresses for the same relay: for example,
.net
,.onion
,.i2p
and for client to select appropriate addresses based on user preferences.Probably my idea is wrong, something like that is already implemented or I'm posting to the wrong place. Sorry if that's the case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: