@i The thing is that it’s really not useful to define super generic terms that are not even pointing to existing implementations, and could have any semantics.
We need a report about what is actually used, and exactly how.
@silverpill @i That is very cool and I don’t know how I haven’t seen it before; it kinda invalidates part of the nlnet funding ideas that I wanted to apply for :)
@Profpatsch @i It is an invaluable tool, and has so much potential, but the development is kind of slow.
Perhaps you can apply as a contributor?
The cool thing about the Activitystreams Activity Vocab RFC is that it’s nearly completely useless for any practical implementation purpose …
@silverpill @liaizon Which, fine, all resources from other places need to be restricted to prevent DoS attacks anyway.
New post: Can we have a more “social” media?
https://profpatsch.de/essays/a-more-social-media
On advertising, the Fediverse, and what a more human social web could look like.
Special mentions: @smallcircles, @phnt, @happy-programming
@Profpatsch You need to create a new signature because the request target is changing. It is a part of a signature base, so the initial signature becomes invalid when the client follows a redirect.
@Profpatsch @liaizon The guide recommends limiting the response size, to prevent DoS.
I also found this in your SECURITY.md:
@Profpatsch @Edent I see this is now merged, has it now been tested against how these new unicode actors will federate across to mastodon and other platforms that don't allow unicode usernames? cc @north
@smallcircles @phnt @happy-programming I am skeptical of that, because of the mess that is the matrix protocol
@julian @Profpatsch oh, yeah, definitely. It's really our only way to authenticate requests right now.
Sorry, but requiring requests to public activitypub objects to be signed is completely whack, merveilles.town
Sorry, but requiring requests to public activitypub objects to be signed is completely whack, merveilles.town