{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"Ava (npub1f6…azcka)","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1f6ugxyxkknket3kkdgu4k0fu74vmshawermkj8d06sz6jts9t4kslazcka","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"nostr:nprofile1qqsw9n8heusyq0el9f99tveg7r0rhcu9tznatuekxt764m78ymqu36cpr3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujucnfw33k76twwpshy6ewvdhk6tcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhs5gtkue  removed #Amber support from #Wisp and now requires nsec stored locally in the app.\n\nCurious about the reasoning. \n\nThe threat model for client-level compromise is worse with local storage—nsec never passes through the client when signing is handled by Amber. \"On device\" isn't the same as \"isolated.\"\n\nWhat problem were you solving?"}