Le mardi 2 juin 2026, 17:06:27 heure d’été d’Europe centrale Marvin W. via Standards a écrit : > Hey, > > I am a little confused about what is the intended scope of a XID, that > is, what it is meant to identify? A device/resource? An entity? A user? > Multiple users? A human?
An entity (which can be a person, a bot, a group of human, whatever), but not a device. > If we are fine with binding a XID to a specific device/resource, we > could "just" use the OMEMO public key for it. Then binding the XID to a > specific user in a cryptographically sane way would just be the same > issue as doing that for OMEMO (which while not entirely solves, has a > lot of work put into it) and there would be no additional identity or > key management tasks. OMEMO is per-device, it doesn't work here. It's also far more complicated to implement. OX could be used, but the key sharing mechanism is not specified anyway, and again it's more complicated to implement the whole thing (and it's not widespread). The current implementation is relatively easy for most clients, as Ed25519 is already used for OMEMO. > This reminds me of something I had in mind for reviving XEP-0174: > adding a TXT key that carries a signature of other parts of the mDNS > records, so that one can discover that a known OMEMO contact is nearby > and send messages to them directly rather than through the server. One of the main purpose of this proposal is to have a ID working for serverless, on which I'll be working soon. I've chosen something easily mappable to LibP2P's Peer ID. Best, Goffi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
