Conversation
Notices
-
#Friendica and #Hubzilla developer Mike Macgirvin listed some of the challenges of #federation between web apps
http://qttr.at/1s0v-
@strypey :]
> Can you retract a private mail message? How?
No. Not in any openly federated system because of the laws of physics (you know, time only goes forward etc.).
> Can you retract a post? How?
No. Not in any openly federated system because of the laws of physics (you know, time only goes forward etc.).
The answers are also true for any other, also closed and centralised, system eventually being sent (copied) to any machine the message author does not control.-
@mmn assuming that the federation of servers doesn't have a protocol for tracking what server(s)/ account(s) a mail or post was delivered to
-
@mmn and a protocol for the sending server requesting the receiving server(s) to delete the mail/post. I think #Hubzilla allows that? @bob
-
@strypey For example !GNUsocial allows for remote deletion but there is no guarantee that anyone cares about the requests. Take older #StatusNet installations for example, they don't support the 'delete' verb.
-
-
@strypey ...but he uses it as a selling point for #Hubzilla that everything is ultramegasuperprivate and whenever you delete something from one place it's gone everywhere etc. etc. which makes me a bit doubtful.
-
@mmn I share these concerns. I think part of the problem is that our language for discussing these issues is currently limited...
-
-
@mmn let's say if I want to keep online comments about my non-mainstream sexual fetishes "private". How "private" they need to be depends...
-
@mmn on whether people finding out will result in a) embarrassment b) losing my job c) my family rejecting me d) thugs beating me to death
-
@mmn in the case of a) even the "private" message option in a proprietary SaaSS offering is probably enough...
-
@mmn but if it's d) users should realise nothing involving an internet-connected computer can be "secure" enough to guarantee "privacy"
-
-
@strypey I gave a talk on this exact distinction a couple of years ago. My aim was to scrape together a useful definition of privacy, which was ultimately this: "Privacy is having control over who gets what information when." —the context around that being that someone who sends naked selfies on SnapChat has a very different interest in who sees what than Edward Snowden. If you want to maximise privacy you have to maximise the ability to pick and choose, fine-grained.
-
@thomask infosec folks and (sometimes) activists understand granular 'threat models', but I feel like a whole new set of terms is needed
-
-
-
My suggestion is that you use a pseudonym for your sexual fetish discussion (in case this is confidential) that has no connection (tor etc. helps jere) with your actual account instead of rely on sysadmins and developers to be perfect beings.
-
-
-
-
-
-
@mmn having said that, you can't trust that any other server will implement any protocol properly.
-
@mmn yet most email gets delivered, and here we are chatting between different servers, so...
-
-
-
-
-
