Here are the (new) requirements for being linked-to from joinmastodon:

joinmastodon.org/covenant

@Gargron Who else has access to mastodon.social data?

The bus factor is important yes, but so is knowing who can read your DMs.

@dansup The person who used to host the mastodon.social infrastructure for about a year prior

@Gargron Who is that? I assume it's not just you since mastodon.social is listed on the instance picker.

Follow

@Gargron @CobaltVelvet Don't you think that is kind of important to mention somewhere?

How can you impose a bus factor rule for the instance picker when you don't even list who has access to the infra?

@dansup @CobaltVelvet I'm not asking anyone to reveal such information. Who has access is internal business, I just want to know whether anyone does.

@Gargron @CobaltVelvet "I'm not asking, I just want to know" does not make sense.

Listing all people that have access to private data somewhere gives more accountability.

CobaltVelvet is not listed as an admin on mastodon.social/about or mastodon.social/about/more

@dansup @CobaltVelvet It makes sense, Dan. There's actually no way to verify externally whether anyone's claim about backups or access is true. So detailed knowledge is absolutely irrelevant, it could be a lie anyway. What matters is public committment.

@Gargron @CobaltVelvet It does make sense but only if instances clearly state who is the bus factor replacement.

I didn't know that CobaltVelvet also had access to this instance before you mentioned it a few moments ago.

What I am saying is that it's important to know that before someone else who we don't know or trust takes over.

@dansup @Gargron @erroruser@example.com
I don't think you are ever going to get every single admin on board. Who gets to set these rules? I know it's probably not reasonable speed wise, but maybe encrypt all the the data so the admin can't even see it? But then this gets into weeds on how to find/remove illegal crap on ones server? I dunno, just throwing that out there.

@bort @dansup End to end encryption doesn't scale to thousands of followers. Asymmetric encryption in the database could be an option, but truthfully, if someone has root access, they can access the master key as well, it's just smoke and mirrors.

@Gargron @dansup Indeed. Interesting dilemma though. Physical access will always trump any kind of security. And people can just lie about who does and doesn't have access. I personally just run my own server for this very reason. I wish this was an option for more people.

@dansup @gargron ehhhh it's the kind of position where privacy is nice. if :gargamel: disappears i'll come forward, until then no one else needs to know (and it's arguably safer that way)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!