On Monday 03 March 2008 17:20, Julien Cornuwel wrote: > Matthew Toseland a ?crit : > > On Sunday 02 March 2008 21:40, Julien Cornuwel wrote: > >> The client decides what to fetch with the informations given by the WoT > >> plugin. It then asks it to the FMS plugin and it works as Martin > >> described in another post. > >> > >> The only issue I see here is that we would have to create 2 SSKs per > >> user : one for the WoT, one for FMS stuff (messages...). > > > > No, each user must have entirely separate publications. Otherwise an attacker > > can identify that two users share the same plugin / the same node. > > I don't understand your point. Of course each identity should have its > own SSK for publications. What's the problem if the same plugin fetches > messages for all its clients ?
"we would have to create 2 SSKs per user : one for the WoT, one for FMS stuff" I misunderstood this. But it's unnecessary anyway, you can use the same SSK and change the document name. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080303/6cb94cef/attachment.pgp>
