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

Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

whispersystems.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 225 posts

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#31

Post by cm3 »

Has anyone given this

https://medium.com/@wireapp/axolotl-and-proteus-788519b186a7

more thought and whether one should avoid Signal and work with a more friendly project that doesn't seemingly fail at its desire to have widespread use of the protocol and actually tried to sue WireApp? WireApp's now approved as a non-infringing implementation in Rust, so that's great for reliability.

Edit: The suing part was initiated by Wire as a response to Moxie demanding GPL compliance over their claim Wire is infringing. I got that backwards.

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#32

Post by zanny »

robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

Matrix uses the same encryption protocol but is also federated, which is nice.

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#33

Post by dmix »

robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

> on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

Why? I haven't had any issues with it.

I even have a shortcut on linux for dmenu, typing "signal" opens the chrome extension URL, opening the app in a new popup window (not a full browser, just the app in a chromeless window). So it functions just like a normal app to me. This is the `signal` bash script:

    #!/usr/bin/dash

    /opt/google/chrome-unstable/google-chrome-unstable --user-data-dir=/home/dmix/.config/google-chrome-unstable --profile-directory=Default --app-id=bikioccmkafdpakkkcpdbppfkghcmihk

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#34

Post by aroch »

dmix wrote: post #33
robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

> on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful. Why? I haven't had any issues with it. I even have a shortcut on linux for dmenu, typing "signal" opens the chrome extension URL, opening the app in a new popup window (not a full browser, just the app in a chromeless window). So it functions just like a normal app to me. This is the `signal` bash script: #!/usr/bin/dash /opt/google/chrome-uns…

Because some of us don't want to use Chrome? How is vendor lock-in at the browser level any better than at the OS or device level?

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#35

Post by webkike »

dmix wrote: post #33
robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

> on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful. Why? I haven't had any issues with it. I even have a shortcut on linux for dmenu, typing "signal" opens the chrome extension URL, opening the app in a new popup window (not a full browser, just the app in a chromeless window). So it functions just like a normal app to me. This is the `signal` bash script: #!/usr/bin/dash /opt/google/chrome-uns…

I use Firefox and hate Chrome. I don't see how this affected by how much you use Chrome

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#37

Post by dmix »

aroch wrote: post #34
dmix wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful. Why? I haven't had any issues with it. I even have a shortcut on linux for dmenu, typing "signal" opens the chrome extension URL, opening the app in a new popup window (not a full browser, just the app in a chromeless window). So it functions just like a normal app to me. This is the `signal` bash script: #!/usr/bin/dash /opt/google/chrome-uns…

Because some of us don't want to use Chrome? How is vendor lock-in at the browser level any better than at the OS or device level?

The script above basically acts like a wrapper script, launching in a small square chromeless window. So you don't even need to use Chrome, just launch that at startup so it runs in the background.

Small software companies have to make platform decisions. They chose the most popular browser (and notably most secure browser), allowing the app to work on all OSes.

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#39

Post by ThatGeoGuy »

zanny wrote: post #32
robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

Matrix uses the same encryption protocol but is also federated, which is nice.

And interesting enough, Matrix faces a different problem than Signal: It doesn't have many good clients at all (at least, last I had checked a few months back). I will agree it would be very nice if Matrix was the dominant messaging protocol that everyone needed to speak with their friends. However, that's not feasible until somebody makes an easy-to-use, beautiful Android and iOS client that doesn't require the user to install multiple bridges or wrangle several accounts to chat with their friends.

Re: Open Whisper Systems Partners with Google on End-To-end Encryption for Allo

#40

Post by dave2000 »

dmix wrote: post #33
robert_foss wrote: post #28

To me it seems like Open Whisper Systems are accepting a lot of concessions in order to have Signal included into products. The trust I once had for moxie is quickly dissipating. * Privacy is only provided in Allo in a secondary mode. Not by default. * Federation of the Signal protocol has been rejected for non-technical reasons. Also, on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful.

> on a personal note, the desktop client requiring chrome is pretty awful. Why? I haven't had any issues with it. I even have a shortcut on linux for dmenu, typing "signal" opens the chrome extension URL, opening the app in a new popup window (not a full browser, just the app in a chromeless window). So it functions just like a normal app to me. This is the `signal` bash script: #!/usr/bin/dash /opt/google/chrome-uns…

I don't use chrome for a number of reasons, the main one being I can't imagine using a browser which doesn't support the blocking of ads, and on Android there are no plugins at all, and given that I use firefox on multiple desktops, all syncing passwords, tabs etc, I'm not about to make an exception for this or that chrome-only feature. I have no idea why chrome doesn't support plugins on Android; they said they'd do it years ago.
Post reply on HN