Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Stephan
@stephancill
Would global message ordering make granular signer permissions more feasible? iirc message ordering was a factor? maybe I’m thinking about something else
3 replies
0 recast
12 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
cc @v @horsefacts.eth
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
What kind of granular permissions ?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Stephan
@stephancill
the most basic would probably be to only give an app permission to write messages of a specific type
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
What’s something you’d build if you had this? This has always been buildable, just avoided the complexity for people to have to reason about the nuances between letting someone write casts vs change follows
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Stephan
@stephancill
This is basic (and frankly expected) security functionality imo I think I was conflating signer permissions with signers going onchain in my question. With strong ordering guarantees signers could be stored off chain on hubs right?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
> This is basic (and frankly expected) security functionality imo Its not obvious to me why this is the case. Can you explain with an example?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction