atproto: verify noisebridge.net handle via DNS TXT record#546
Open
mcint wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
f160d65 to
f54dda3
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Verify the
noisebridge.netatproto/Bluesky handle via a DNSTXTrecord instead of the m3/caddy HTTP handler.Change
Add to the
noisebridge.netzone:and remove the Caddy
handle /.well-known/atproto-didblock, along with the now-unusednoisebridge_atproto_didvar and its vault entry. SOA serial bumped.Also it seems odd to store public attestation values encrypted in the vault—in principle, a reverse linkability argument, but not here.
Why
We want a validated domain handle on bsky, or rather in the atproto ecosystem
didwhen validation absentThe DNS
TXTmethod is the atproto-preferred mechanism, avoids a configuration complexity & drift in Caddy, and keeps the (non-secret) DID in the public zone file in plaintext — no vault entry needed.I do plan to propose a later PR for HTTP and DNS monitoring, so we catch breaks on deploy.
Why not HTTP again
I think atproto validation expects that
/.well-known/atproto-didgets served a 200 fromnoisebridge.net, and not a 302 towww.noisebridge.netwith 200 there.www(in browser) is also blocked by anubis—in any case there's complexity, and configuration drift there.The bare
redir https://www.noisebridge.net{uri}in thenoisebridge.netCaddy site shadows thehandle /.well-known/atproto-didblock (Caddy directive ordering), so the HTTP method silently 302-redirected that path to the wiki and never served the DID:Scope
I'm proposing a DNS change. I'd also drafted, with claude, a deploy-time HTTP- & DNS-verification monitoring machinery originally bundled here, but I'm deferring it to a separate, reframed PR (general DNS + HTTP-probe monitoring, not atproto-specific). That WIP is preserved on the
atproto-handle-dns-draft-wipbranch.