Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

rumuki.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 207 posts

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#111

Post by ciex »

nmat wrote: post #94

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it will work in practice. These moments happen naturally because the couple trusts in each other. Convincing my girlfriend to download a specific app so that we can film something is a bit odd. People don't care that much about how things are encrypted or about complex security mechanisms, they want something that is easy to use. Snapshat is easy to use for example. Everyon…

I agree with you, not only because couples do indeed trust each other, but also because it may come off as mistrusting to ask your s.o. to use something like this.

However, I think there might be a market for this with casual hookups. In these situations, you may want to let someone access private videos/pictures, but don't trust them enough to just send it, especially if your face is included. Receivers might also be more inclined to pay. Additionally, while I think it would be acceptable in this situation to ask someone to install an app, the makers of this have to take extra care to ensure that this looks serious and doesn't come off as a scam.

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#112

Post by ivanhoe »

if it's shown on the screen it can be copied, so in the end it's again all about trusting that person. Still this type of protection is cool as it makes it harder for accidents to happen, or if phone gets stolen it gives you some level of protection.

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#113

Post by swalsh »

shiado wrote: post #81

This is a really cool concept. But ultimately you cannot get past the analog hole. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_hole

Reminds of that time someone invented dropbox, and one of the top comments was "For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software."

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#114

Post by pmcpinto »

nmat wrote: post #94

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it will work in practice. These moments happen naturally because the couple trusts in each other. Convincing my girlfriend to download a specific app so that we can film something is a bit odd. People don't care that much about how things are encrypted or about complex security mechanisms, they want something that is easy to use. Snapshat is easy to use for example. Everyon…

I agree, in the "heat" of the moment nobody remembers if the video end up being shared with somebody else without consent.

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#115

Post by phkahler »

Freak_NL wrote: post #51
nathankot wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP here, this is addressed in the FAQ, I'll paste it here :) > How do I know my partner won't abuse my trust? > You can't. However with Rumuki you have the discretion to only grant playbacks when you can keep an eye on them. You also have the option to revoke all playback grants and delete the recording if trust is ever lost.

While you literally did address the question (and I applaud you for responding), you didn't actually answer it. There is, of course, no technological way to prevent someone from capturing a video through the analogue hole (i.e., pointing a camera to the video as it is played), even if we assume that is possible that a consumer device can be controlled to such an extent that its owner can't find a way to capture the v…

I you are physically present when you grant access you can ensure they do not record with something else via the analog hole. If you're at work and they're at home and would like to view it then sure, there's a plausible covert copy being made if you agree to let them view it.

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#117

Post by WheelsAtLarge »

Great idea, I know it's hard to enforce 100% due to the analog hole but I think it has a future. Even a little enforcement is better than none. My suggestion is to give each video a time to expire. You should also get someone, with a good security reputation,to do a security audit on the encryption that way you can claim 100% encryption security.

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#118

Post by sarreph »

nmat wrote: post #94

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it will work in practice. These moments happen naturally because the couple trusts in each other. Convincing my girlfriend to download a specific app so that we can film something is a bit odd. People don't care that much about how things are encrypted or about complex security mechanisms, they want something that is easy to use. Snapshat is easy to use for example. Everyon…

Forgive me, nmat, but 'Snapshat' sounds like a niche spin-off app and a missed opportunity for those wanting to share something else of a private nature. :)

Re: Show HN: Rumuki, a prenup for sex tapes

#120

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway »

bootlooped wrote: post #60
ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh-oh, nobody wants their face filmed while watching porn. And again, it is a client app, assume it would be modified by a malicious party. Just admit the problem is not possible to solve.

Like any other security concern, I don't think it's ever 100% solvable, you just get as close to solved as you reasonably can.

Some security problems are theoretically solvable, some are not. This one is not solvable, you can't get closer to solved as there is no "solved" state.

For example, sending a message between party A and party B so no party C can read it is possible, given that party A and party B have some way to pre-share key. Sending a message from party A to party B in a way that party B knows it is from party A but is unable to prove it to any third-party is, again, possible under some reasonable conditions, see OTR/Axolotl. Sending a message from party A to party B in a way party B can read the message but can't resend it is impossible under any conditions.

In most cases DRM-like functionality is a bullshit. Secret sharing is known to protect against outsiders only. You can use it to split backups so they are harder to steal [1]. The scheme will never work for cases when malicious party has the whole secret at some point in time.

[1] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/07/dnssec_root_k...

Post reply on HN