FBXL Social

Hopefully (quantum resistant) digital signatures will save us somewhat.
But we'd have to actually meet each other in real life like he suggests to exchange keys.

We can use blind signatures and ring signatures to add pseudonymity and anonymity, respectively, back on top of that real-face-based foundation.

What do you mean?

True. I guess either don't let it be transitive or be careful who you trust. You wouldn't want to be friends with someone you suspect would do that anyway

I once had an idea for a social network or board based on this: https://usagi.reisen/g/YEJ0R4CL#YEJ0R4CL

Also, if it's transitive, then if B tries to do that you can stop trusting them. Assuming that you detect it.
This may not be perfect, but it's better than just letting bots run wild.

Good idea. Problem is: not everyone wants to be identified with their real face and name, which they would intrinsically be if this is implemented naively. I can't see how my suggestions for adding it back (ring and blind signatures) would work if you keep track of the graph. For instance, how would you decide which keys go in the ring? How would you know which pseudonyms to trust?
I wonder if there is or can be cryptography that solves or will solve these problems.

I'm not sure what you mean.
Ring signatures were meant to be for anonymity (with the ring being your anonymity set) and blind signatures for pseudonymity. Although, come to think of it, what we really want is some way of deriving a new pseudonymous keypair from the old "verinymous" (for want of a better word) one (inheriting the trust without inheriting the identity link), not just creating a temporary pseudonym for one use.

Yeah, but that can't be used to build, say, an image- or textboard because the anonymity sets / rings are subjective for each user.

>I wonder if there is or can be cryptography that solves or will solve these problems.
@rq You're a cryptographer. Do you have any ideas? Maybe when you feel up to it.