Live data from Hacker News

WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

whispersystems.org

31–40 of 386 posts

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#31
post #25

Is there any reasonable way to verify that end-to-end encryption is actually being used, and used correctly? From a user's point of view the app looks and works exactly the same as before, except for the addition of a QR code which could be doing anything.

Define 'reasonable'.

Essentially, no. You have to trust that the app is really doing what it claims to be doing.

If it were open source, would it be different? Maybe. Signal Messenger is open source and the Android build is reproducible. However, the way you reproduce it is to run a Docker image, so that isn't really meaningful unless you audit the code that's used to build it. And then audit the code of the app itself. Fortunately, the Android app is written in Java, so you can easily do static analysis to narrow down what code needs to be audited. Unfortunately, it also includes native code that can reach into arbitrary parts of the heap if it were to try and steal keys. So you'd have to audit all of that. And then keep up with all the changes. Which you aren't going to do.

Even if you did all of that, at some point the naughty thought will occur to you that all your effort can be undone by an operating system update that contains more than it claims to. And then you'll give up.

In practice, it's impossible to really verify anything about how our modern computers work: there are too many people and companies who can silently access key material or just fool us in other ways.

So it's best to understand this work in context - this is not about allowing you to use WhatsApp if your threat model is that WhatsApp is entirely malicious. It's about discouraging governments from going to WhatsApp and saying "you need to give us all your data" because it creates the same situation Apple has: WhatsApp would need to write new software to undo the encryption, and that can be legally argued to be "compelled speech", and thus it can fall outside the legal powers granted under wiretap orders.

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#32
Very cool, but I wonder when it'll be possible to key Signal off of something other than my phone number, and when it will be possible to support multiple accounts (e.g. phone numbers) on a single device. Also, I wonder when it'll be possible for me to successfully reset Signal registration.

And when I'll be able to share my certifications of contacts with other contacts …

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#33
post #6

I should use this as a strong argument for the rest of my no-please-not-another-instant-messenger-i-stay-with-whatsapp-contacts: When whatsapp is implementing the signal protocol, why should one use whatsapp in the first place?[1] I hope this good advertisement gives signal another round of traction. [1] Ok, you've got me. The less techie contacts will swing the feature-bat and the other already use signal.

"Normal" people will not have their choice of messenger swayed by any argument that uses the word "protocol".

Point taken. If I talk to "normal" people, I wouldn't use the word "protocol" neither (or at least not as conversation starter). Normal-people-rephrased it's more like

"When whatsapp take the fundamental core from signal..."

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#34
post #20

This is really excellent. A few thoughts: 1) They seem to have replaced TLS/SSL between client and server with "Noise Pipes". Based on a couple of minutes Googling this seems to be a brand new one-man protocol from Trevor Perrin (the same guy who did Axoltl on which Signal is based). At least, I'd never heard of it. I wonder if this is the first inkling of a post-TLS future? http://noiseprotocol.org/noise.html 2) It'…

> They seem to have replaced TLS/SSL between client and server with "Noise Pipes". WhatsApp was already using a custom protocol instead of TLS. We worked with them to transition over to Noise Pipes, which has some advantages over what they were doing before. Also, we've renamed Axolotl to Signal Protocol: https://whispersystems.org/blog/signal-inside-and-out/

It is killing me that you didn't rename Signal to Axolotl.

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#36
Without whatsapp being open source, how do we know for sure that Facebook is not somehow storing or reading our messages?

As good as this sounds on paper, I hesitate to trust Facebook to transmit my data without wanting to peek a bit. I currently use both Whatsapp and Signal and will probably continue to do the same unless there is a way for users to verify Facebook doesn't keep a copy.

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#37
post #36

Without whatsapp being open source, how do we know for sure that Facebook is not somehow storing or reading our messages? As good as this sounds on paper, I hesitate to trust Facebook to transmit my data without wanting to peek a bit. I currently use both Whatsapp and Signal and will probably continue to do the same unless there is a way for users to verify Facebook doesn't keep a copy.

Closed source software isn't impenetrable. The idea that you need source code to evaluate security claims is mostly a meme from the 1990s.

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#38
post #25

Is there any reasonable way to verify that end-to-end encryption is actually being used, and used correctly? From a user's point of view the app looks and works exactly the same as before, except for the addition of a QR code which could be doing anything.

Create a new domain, new site, send a link through whatsapp, see if it's pinged by their servers. That would be my first test.

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#39

This is really excellent. A few thoughts: 1) They seem to have replaced TLS/SSL between client and server with "Noise Pipes". Based on a couple of minutes Googling this seems to be a brand new one-man protocol from Trevor Perrin (the same guy who did Axoltl on which Signal is based). At least, I'd never heard of it. I wonder if this is the first inkling of a post-TLS future? http://noiseprotocol.org/noise.html 2) It'…

Noise is really interesting. I'd hoped from the name that it might incorporate some of the ideas behind Dust[1], which attempts to hide even that there is a Dust session going on, and what the public and private keys of the recipients are. No such luck — still, it looks very interesting.

[1] http://freehaven.net/anonbib/cache/wileydust.pdf

Re: WhatsApp's Signal Protocol integration is now complete

#40

This is really excellent. A few thoughts: 1) They seem to have replaced TLS/SSL between client and server with "Noise Pipes". Based on a couple of minutes Googling this seems to be a brand new one-man protocol from Trevor Perrin (the same guy who did Axoltl on which Signal is based). At least, I'd never heard of it. I wonder if this is the first inkling of a post-TLS future? http://noiseprotocol.org/noise.html 2) It'…

> It's a shame to see key words be killed off by internationalisation concerns [....] I hope further research here can develop better replacements for encoding short binary strings in i18n friendly ways I rather like the urbit way of encoding numbers. I can't remember the exact details but it's something like: There are 256 unique three letter words (all nonsense, but deliberately picked to be possible to pronounce).…

> deliberately picked to be possible to pronounce

That only works in English, again.

Post reply on HN