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

Signal Desktop

whispersystems.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 288 posts

Re: Signal Desktop

#151

Post by Sephr »

moxie wrote: post #9
thecoffman wrote: post #7

Shame that its Android only. Was really looking forward to giving this a try!

For now! We're hiring, if you know anyone that wants to help us speed up iOS development: https://whispersystems.org/workworkwork/

Why tie it to a phone at all? Why not have this Chrome app work standalone? Apple's messaging app uses end-to-end encryption and it can be routed to multiple devices. I would expect Signal to strive to attain parity with Apple's offerings.

Also, the naming of this app is pretty disingenuous. This app should be called "Signal Remote", since it's not running the actual Signal comms on my desktop, it's remotely controlling Signal on my phone.

Re: Signal Desktop

#152

Post by tptacek »

jhasse wrote: post #92
MikeKusold wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram is closed source so we can't verify that they implemented encryption properly, and only Secret Chats have the messages encrypted. https://telegram.org/faq#q-so-how-do-you-encrypt-data

The end to end encryption is open source.

The server is published?

Re: Signal Desktop

#153

Post by morsch »

Lazare wrote: post #125
moxie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we were going to rank our priorities, they would be in this order: 1) Make mass surveillance impossible. 2) Stop targeted attacks against crypto nerds. It's not that we don't find #2 laudable, but optimizing for #1 takes precedence when we're making decisions. If you don't want to use your phone number, don't use it. You can register with any GV, Twilio, Voicepulse, or other throwaway VoIP number. If you don't wan…

> 1) Make mass surveillance impossible. A worthy goal. But let's be real; to stop mass surveillance by writing a new chat program, you need mass adoption of your new program, and that means you need truly amazing UX. If you write something which is technically perfect and would work if it was widely used, but nobody uses it because Telegram is just a little bit easier to get started with, and has nice cartoon drawing…

Signal combines a competent and relatable user experience with a reliable security model. The latter is required to make a few people install it, the former is required to make their acquaintances install it, too.

Re: Signal Desktop

#154

Post by giancarlostoro »

joshka wrote: post #55
phantom_oracle wrote: post #49

I have a question about this... Say a team of volunteers were willing to spend time to make something like a QT- or GTK-based native desktop application instead. How much more difficult would this be compared to what they did/used now? (the chrome-app) ? Also, will it take significantly longer to build such a native app? Anybody with experience building native apps, please share.

What about using something like http://electron.atom.io instead. This would likely be the best of both worlds - native, but not browser-dependent.

I really wish this was an Electron / nw.js app instead of a Chrome plugin.

Re: Signal Desktop

#155

Post by marssaxman »

frayesto wrote: post #48
mrmondo wrote: post #47

Requiring a google email address and chrome for a secure messaging system? Very strange move.

They're using Google groups to manage the beta testing program. Make sense since that's how you sign into the Chrome app store to download the app.

Oh, well, nevermind then! I'm not signing in to some damn app store no matter how cool the software may be.

Re: Signal Desktop

#156

Post by HappyTypist »

darklajid wrote: post #133
moxie wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty big holiday wishlist. =) This is the world we live in: people do most of their communication on mobile devices running iOS or Android, use Chrome on the desktop, and expect contact discovery to be automatic in their social apps. The browser has won the desktop, iOS and Android have won mobile, and the velocity of the ecosystem is unlikely to make "distributed" communication mechanisms possible for som…

If we ever meet I'll buy you a beer for the year of the Linux desktop line. But honestly: I understand mobile support for iOS/Android only. I don't understand Chrome as a platform (FF isn't dead. And the biggest reason for that is that I fail to understand why that client needs to be 'web based' and then again not. A web app in a silo) Mobile numbers.. Why? I mean, if 90% of the population WANT mum to see that they u…

Perhaps Signal just isn't for you. No one who I've introduced signal to has ever had a problem with it. Now if you add a randomly generated 128 bit account identifier, then people WILL have problems with it. Not with you, but with your mum/grandma.

I really think Signal might not be for you. Signal is not about building the most secure or private system, it's about building the first mass-market encrypted that that's Good Enough. Signal is a infinite percent improvement over plaintext/https. It's not supposed to be as good as OTR.

Re: Signal Desktop

#157

Post by izacus »

moxie wrote: post #127
darklajid wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your reply. I really appreciate it. As I stated earlier, I feel bad about 'expecting more' here - I certainly see the appeal of a popular ~decent~ option. Without trying to derail this further, let me look at those points: If I use throwaway numbers: What happens if I lose access? Do I _need_ the number for anything in the future (say, device died)? Can someone else mess with me if they get access to th…

That's a pretty big holiday wishlist. =) This is the world we live in: people do most of their communication on mobile devices running iOS or Android, use Chrome on the desktop, and expect contact discovery to be automatic in their social apps. The browser has won the desktop, iOS and Android have won mobile, and the velocity of the ecosystem is unlikely to make "distributed" communication mechanisms possible for som…

The problem of course being that those users that use the closed source Google browser and iOS won't care much about what Signal is offering either. They're already using Hangouts, iMessage and Signal is pretty much a downgrade from those.

Re: Signal Desktop

#158

Post by 01Michael10 »

dates wrote: post #71
darklajid wrote: post #59

I'm feeling dirty, because I don't like to be that negative, especially if we're talking open-source software. And I feel that I kinda hold this project to higher standards: If I compare this to WhatsApp/Telegram/Threema/Whatever, I inheritently, somewhat subconciously expect more from Signal. And I'm disappointed. I tend to repeat the 'central server' and 'a phone number is not an address and not public information,…

To me, this announcement feels pre-mature, the software doesn't seem ready until it integrates with other clients. But I think, giving time, your concerns could be addressed: -Integration with other devices, backing up and importing your back up between devices, are features that will come, eventually. -There are several 3rd party standalone desktop apps being developed for Signal. -You could maybe build a Textsecure…

Huh? It's pre-mature to announce a beta product?

Re: Signal Desktop

#159

Post by JshWright »

jegutman wrote: post #150
JshWright wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Invite them to... not use it? That seems like a solid way to turn people off from using a service, not a way get them excited about it.

I don't feel strongly about the practice either way, but you're also indirectly prioritizing users who are most willing to share the product. So they're hoping their early users are also those most willing to spread. The "connectors" of the products ecosystem.

You're prioritizing users who are willing to spam their friends about a product they can't even use.

I would be _far_ more likely to tell my friends about the product if I could actually use it and be able to vouch for it (as I have with the mobile version of TextSecure/Signal).

Forcing me to get my friends to visit a page where they will find out about an application they can't even use is just annoying.

Re: Signal Desktop

#160

Post by oceanstone »

darklajid wrote: post #133
moxie wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty big holiday wishlist. =) This is the world we live in: people do most of their communication on mobile devices running iOS or Android, use Chrome on the desktop, and expect contact discovery to be automatic in their social apps. The browser has won the desktop, iOS and Android have won mobile, and the velocity of the ecosystem is unlikely to make "distributed" communication mechanisms possible for som…

If we ever meet I'll buy you a beer for the year of the Linux desktop line. But honestly: I understand mobile support for iOS/Android only. I don't understand Chrome as a platform (FF isn't dead. And the biggest reason for that is that I fail to understand why that client needs to be 'web based' and then again not. A web app in a silo) Mobile numbers.. Why? I mean, if 90% of the population WANT mum to see that they u…

> I understand mobile support for iOS/Android only. I don't understand Chrome as a platform

> Mobile numbers.. Why?

Pidgin + OTR works on Linux, and doesn't relate to mobile numbers or Chrome at all. This might be a better fit for you.

Post reply on HN