Another thing: At the moment, anyone could claim that some feed contained a certain message which was then removed again by just creating the hash over the fake message in said feed and invented timestamp themselves. Nobody can ever verify that this was never the case in the first place and completely made up. So, our twt hashes have to be taken with a grain of salt.
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org matter of fact, earlier you posted:
2024-09-19T20:20:00+02:00 I don't like Australians!
And then deleted it, fearing the Australian Mafia (which, as we know, is very powerful in Bavaria). But I got the hash for it, p5zdahq
, and that timestamp has tt
written all over it. That’s my proof! 😅😅😅
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org Sorry could you explain this sifferently?
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org Walk me through this? 🤔 I get what you’re saying, but I’m too stupid to be a “hacker” 🤣
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org Hmmm I’m not sure sure I get what you’re getting at here. In order for this to be true, yarnd
would have to be maliciously fabricating a Twt with the Hash D.
@movq@www.uninformativ.de Care to explain how this explicit/attack works for me? 🤣
@movq@www.uninformativ.de Yes that’s true they are only integrity checks. But beyond a malicious pod (ignore yarnd’a gossiping protocol for now) how does what @lyse@lyse.isobeef.org presented work exactly? 😅