20 points
*

I dislike when they say in news clips that Signal represents the “current gold standard” for E2EE chats, it doesn’t, Signal is a helluva lot better than the commercial stuff that mines user data but there’s stuff like SimpleX Chat that doesn’t leak even metadata because it doesn’t have it.

Still, this is a good thing, these megacorps have their iron grip on people because they have raised walls around their services making it painful for people to move to a different service, tearing down those walls can only help us all.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Signal encryption can be taken out of the app and applied elsewhere, because it has been already done. SimpleX is nice but this is single app single implementation thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

It appears SimpleX is not even available for me (Android 8).

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The standard is about the protocol, not every bit of the implementation. 3DH / X3DH and double ratchet, etc, are among the best for E2EE.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Thanks for the tip about SimpleX, that looks interesting! I could never use Signal due to the way they operate and force you to rely on their and Google’s servers, actively blocking forks from their network. So much for FOSS…

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

They do provide an apk outside of the Play Store, that uses a Web Socket for push notifications. Not he best way of going about it, but hey, it exists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

SimpleX is very neat. But it cannot do multiple devices unless you count shutting down, exporting database to new device replacing existing database as a sensible workflow. Using the database on two devices at once will break encryption and cause all sorts of weird problems.

permalink
report
parent
reply

@jherazob @Mysteriarch Though great with some worthy competition for Signal!

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

A standard is also about broad adoption though, so I don’t think you can call SimpleX a standard yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

@Mysteriarch I deeply hope that there will be some connection to Matrix in the future.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

At least we know that this won’t be open federation. But still maybe some company could bridge them or at least could become a JMP.chat like service for WhatsApp.

Element wrote a first look summary on this: https://element.io/blog/the-eu-digital-markets-act-is-here/

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Wake up Neo. Follow the white rabbit

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

Meta says that it will only allow third-party developers to use another protocol besides Signal, “if they are able to demonstrate it offers the same security guarantees as Signal.”

If matrix finally finishes implementing MLS, maybe they could convince meta to use it.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

permalink
report
reply
1 point

What is the advantage of this over olm/megolm?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why MLS?

In most cases, MLS has better performance in large groups than Olm/Megolm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Last time they touched an open chat protocol, they hung it out to dry. That was XMPP. That’s why more than half of the fediverse is reluctant or outright hostile to federate with anything meta.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

maybe they could convince meta to use it

I think he/she meant convincing Meta to use MLS, not Matrix.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Now that I read it again, you may be right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

XMPP is used in many, many places. It’s just not usually explicitly known that the backend is using that protocol

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You are underplaying the damage Google and FB did to XMPP. It wasn’t supposed to be relegated to an obscure backend protocol. The involvement of those companies ensured that it didn’t become a popular user-facing protocol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
115 points

Meta … can’t guarantee “what a third-party provider does with sent or received messages.”

I’m more concerned with what the first-party provider is doing with my sent or received messages when that first-party is Facebook!

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Meta … can’t guarantee “what a third-party provider does with sent or received messages.”

We (Meta) can guarantee that we do all the bad stuffs to your data!

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Does this mean third party apps will be able to interact with whatsapp?

permalink
report
reply
10 points
*

only when the service specifically requests it and agrees to Whatsapp’s terms.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

So I [in theory, I don’t know how to start with this on a technical level] could make a third-party Signal-compatible app, but allow it to connect to Whatsapp instead of Signal? Even if I can’t use my Signal account to contact Whatsapp people, that’s still potentially useful. Although I imagine the terms I’d have to agree to to do so would be full of nonsense that stops this being remotely feasible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

could make a third-party Signal-compatible app, but allow it to connect to Whatsapp instead of Signal?

you’d have to create a messaging service, not just a client.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@beehaw.org

Create post

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 2.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.9K

    Posts

  • 53K

    Comments