| JanZerebecki added a comment. |
Interesting, maybe this can lead to a distributed truthy bubble (see [:w:en:Filter bubble]), where the user can chose instead of someone else.
We might want to get #MediaWiki-extensions-WikibaseQualityExternalValidation done first.
Should really any user be able to sign statements? I think it would be good to define a new user group which holds the right to do this. In this way the community would be able to decide which institutions are reliable / matching our scope.
Why not curate a list of reliable/matching signing identities instead?
The useful crypto in the browser part can be solved in the same way Debian or Tor solve software distribution. The major browsers are working on parts that are necessary for it, though AFAIK no browser is anywhere near Debian yet, much less standardized.
Why use a sha1 instead of inlining the normalized serialization in the text to sign?
Why add the current date and time?
Why add the signer's identity?
How do you revoke a signature?
How do you guard against being able to send the user only a selective part of the signatures?
How do you verify what a revision contains and that the revision wasn't changed?
Cc: jayvdb, Scott_WUaS, tfmorris, Spinster, TomT0m, Denny, Eloquence, JanZerebecki, T.seppelt, Aklapper, daniel, Zppix, Lydia_Pintscher, D3r1ck01, Izno, Wikidata-bugs, aude, TheDJ, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
