Upvotes seem to just federate as likes and dislikes.

  • m_f@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    4 days ago

    The userbase is small enough that hashing would be easy cracked by a determined person. Even with salting, iterating through the entire userbase and hashing each username+salt to check for a match would probably not take long

    • rglullis@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Replace “hashing” with “encrypted” (perhaps just using a symmetric key that the admin sets up) and then it gets impossible to know for any outsiders who is the real user behind the vote.

      I for one just wish people understood once and for all that anything you do on social media is public.

      If you are not comfortable backing up your opinion or action, then don’t do it.

      • Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 days ago

        Assuming each user will always encrypt to the same value, this still loses to statistical attacks.

        As a simple example, users are e.g. more likely to vote on threads they comment in. With data reaching back far enough, people who exhibit “normal” behavior will be identified with high certainty.

    • irelephant 🍭@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      What if a uuid is generated every time a user signs up, and every upvote iterates through the uuids?