RetroFed Forum
Your home away from modern life.
Search Categories Forum list Register Log in
About RetroFed
RetroFed

Welcome to the nostalgia-filled piefed instance of yesteryear.

Open Registration with Application questionnaire.

If you have a question or comment you can post in !meta@retrofed.com or message @DosDude@retrofed.com or @Die4Ever@retrofed.com

In case of downtime and/or emergency, we will post updates on @DosDude@mastodon.social

Some rules we try to uphold:

  • Be civil. Bigotry is not welcome. This includes (but is not limited to): transphobia, queerphobia, racism, ageism and ableism. We do not promote hate.
  • Communities need to be Retro or Retro-adjacent.
  • Please don't upload pornographic content. (use an external image host for that)
72 registered users
Administrators: DosDude, Die4Ever
Visit retrofed.com
Project Uniquonym - a concept (not yet implemented) for coupling pseudonymity with limits on sybil attacks / astroturfing
Post Reply RetroFed Forum Forum Index » Cryptography
AuthorMessage
A1kmm lemmy.amxl.com A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
Joined: 2023-05-08
Quote
Link: https://lemmy.amxl.com/c/project_uniquonym?dataType=Post&sort=Old

I'm logging my idea across a series of posts with essays on different sub-parts of it in a Lemmy community created for it.

What do you think - does anyone see any obvious problems that might come up as it is implemented? Is there anything you'd do differently?

There are still some big decisions (e.g. how to do the ZKP part, including what type of ZKPs to use), and some big unknowns (I'm still not certain implementing TLS 1.3 on TPM 2.0 primitives is going to stand up and/or create a valid audit hash attestation to go into the proof, and the proofs might test the limits of what's possible).
1   Original
Post Reply
Back to top
Powered by PieFed · PieBB frontend · All times are Europe/Amsterdam