Nostr View

6 hours in to figuring out remote connect with Amber. None of the libraries work. The AI is stumped. The relays are wonky. There is apparently no documentation.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 8d

It works with your web application on PC?

Silberengel @Silberengel - 7d

I have no idea, but I might take another run at it.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 7d

I was using the Lumina login for Amber, but it was read-only. I'll post here, if I get it running.

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

Here's some of the dirtiest code I've ever written, but nak bunker is fully working, with QR codes that are easy to scan on mobile and nostrclient token support for clients that don't accept bunker URLs. Fiatjaf has implemented persistence and profiles. So now nak bunker is usable as a true signer, not just for dev purposes. QR code support has been merged to master. The nostrconnect stuff won’t make it in as-is. It's dirty, dirty stdin hacking and fiatjaf no gusta. Still, it works. Just point nak bunker to some relay other than relay.nsec.app, nos.lol, etc. I’ve had zero login failures in the past three days, while with Amber + relay.nsec.app, signing is failing at least 20% of the time: https://github.com/fiatjaf/nak/pull/73

Silberengel @Silberengel - 5d

Yeah, Amber is wonky, but I think it's that relay. Adding more relays seems to help.

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

A lot of clients won’t let you pick a relay, unfortunately. Some even have a textbox for relays, but it’s often broken. The strange thing is that Bunklay used to work well for me. And I don’t see any error messages in the logs... With nos.lol, for example, I at least get errors telling me to send notes with PoW 28 or warning me about rate limits. But with Amber + relay.nsec.app simply doesn’t forward signing requests. Everything fails silently. I don’t know if relay.nsec.app has adopted more aggressive anti-spam policies or if this is a connectivity issue. I’ve noticed that a lot of people facing issues with Amber + relay.nsec.app are in Europe like me. Plus, when I ask folks in the US to reproduce the issue, they can’t (tagging nostr:nprofile1qqst6jhruelzn9jdf9qhyfsac3fetjyld0fwwary9cmxzfchrhacragppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj76n9d3k8jenfwd5zumrpdejz7yj9f6t just in case he knows anything about it). Anyway, nak bunker seems to be working well. Maybe it’s the naive, totally ad-hoc, non-production heavy nature of the code (sometimes simple work) but even with relay.nsec.app, things are working better. I may add a setting to Haven to allow Kind: 24133 events from outside the WoT. Still, every time I do this kind of thing, I end up regretting it. Ideally, we should have more NIP-46 specialised relays, and clients should take the time to both fix their NIP-46 integration and pick two or three trustworthy default relays when creating nostrconnect tokens. Having about every client out there defaulting to a single relay is just... Not great.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 5d

Yeah, it's unfortunate. But I think you can use Damus and Primal and Band for it, as well.

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

Agreed. Honestly, this is a noobir question, but is there anything special at all about 24133 that requires a special relay? I'm not being sarcastic here, it's a genuine question, maybe folks want to restrict queries, require auth or promote lower latency + some more relaxed policies given the sheer amount of notes. Is there a legitimate reason to centralise signing in Software like NIP-46 or is everyone doing it just because?

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

Agreed. Honestly, this is a noobie question, but is there anything special at all about lind 24133 that requires special relay software? I'm not being sarcastic here, it's a genuine question, maybe folks want to restrict queries, require auth or promote lower latency + some more relaxed policies given the sheer amount of notes. Is there a legitimate reason to centralise signing in Software like Bunklay or is everyone doing it just because? nostr:nprofile1qqs827g8dkd07zjvlhh60csytujgd3l9mz7x807xk3fewge7rwlukxgpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejz772u5wm, I assume that you are the right person to ask here?

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

Agreed. Honestly, this is a noobie question, but is there anything special at all about kind 24133 that requires special relay software? I'm not being sarcastic here, it's a genuine question, maybe folks want to restrict queries, require auth or promote lower latency + some more relaxed policies given the sheer amount of notes. Is there a legitimate reason to centralise signing in Software like Bunklay or is everyone doing it just because? nostr:nprofile1qqs827g8dkd07zjvlhh60csytujgd3l9mz7x807xk3fewge7rwlukxgpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejz772u5wm, I assume that you are the right person to ask here?

greenart7c3 @greenart7c3 - 5d

Any relay that accepts ephemeral events should work Paid relays don't work for this because clients need to create a new keypair for each login Auth relays can work but no clients use auth for the bunker stuff so I wasn't able to test What can happen with public relays like Damus is that it rate limit you

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 5d

Yes. It's silly but relays like nostr.mom and nos.lol ask for PoW for Kind 24133, damus and nostr.band quickly starts to rate limit, and as you said, a lot of clients won't do auth. Also there's mostly no easy way to whitelist specific pubkeys as a lot of clients use random client keys. This is my main problem with supporting NIP-46 (and NWC as well) with Haven. For most clients to work properly I would have to allow everyone to write Kind 24133 notes. Shouldn't he a major problem given that these are ephemeral, but still... We need better NIP-46 libraries for clients so that I can at least require AUTH and whitelist a few client pubkeys.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 3d

I whitelisted kind 24133 on wss://thecitadel.nostr1.com . That's our public relay.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 3d

Could maybe also use wss://freelay.sovbit.host from nostr:npub1gnwpctdec0aa00hfy4lvadftu08ccs9677mr73h9ddv2zvw8fu9smmerrq .

Silberengel @Silberengel - 3d

🥰 Thank you!

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 3d

Thanks, both. This will definitely help! Access to TheForest was the best 300 sats "investment" I’ve made on Nostr :) Siberengel, just a heads-up from someone a bit disappointed with… well, humanity in general (you have to be a special kind of person to attack an unfunded open source dev paying for their infra out of pocket… but alas, here we are): I may be preaching to the choir here, since you’ve been running TheForest for a while and have probably whitelisted other kinds of notes before… but do set tight policies and keep an eye on your observability tools. I don’t know if you’ve had to deal with “enthusiastic fans” “improving Nostr” before… but folks can be very ingenious when attacking relays. I’ve had to deal with a bit of everything, from carefully crafted queries with complex filters designed to choke Khatru, to bots writing massive notes until the relay runs out of disk space. Hopefully I’m just being paranoid here and folks won’t try (or manage) much with an exotic ephemeral kind. But sadly, on the internet, good deeds rarely go unpunished 🤣.

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 3d

By the way, tried to zap you, got a timeout from Alby just for a change :).

Silberengel @Silberengel - 3d

Yeah, we had to think, for a while, before determining if thecitadel should be public. It seems to work because it contains no "social notes" (kind 01 or 1111), but cloudfodder sometimes has to deal with some craziness. We might eventually move to AUTH without a whitelist, as needing to do that ping-pong authorization slows them down.

Silberengel @Silberengel - 3d

Thanks, anyway. The server was down, yesterday. Took our NIP-05s out, so I noticed quickly, but it took a while to resolve.

Anthony Accioly @Anthony Accioly - 3d

I think the 300 sats are a good deterrent. But TheForest does accept social notes, right? (At least for "paying" members?) Ah, on that front... The script kiddies have evolved. AUTH no longer deters them, unfortunately... But it does deter... like 90% of clients on Nostr from writing to and fetching kind 24133, unfortunately. I mean, AUTH does help a bit, PoW above 28 also helps a bit, but other than charging some sats or a strict WoT I haven't found a good solution for public relays yet.

Showing page 1 of 2 pages