111–120 of 450 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are an active target of a tier 1 state, your endpoint will be compromised, your decrypted communication will be read, and no cryptosystem will prevent this.
And if you were aware that a state-level actor is targeting you, you'd be using a programmable, self-contained HSM for all sensitive computation. This is a topic I'm working on actually.
So, I looked into GPG. Holy shit there's a ton of options and complexity. High-assurance security says subset to minimal thing that works for increased trustworthiness. I noticed it could encrypt files with others' public keys. The person that contacted me was able to receive attached files. Text editors only have so many 0-days left in them & are easy to sandbox. So, I decided on this protocol:
1. Type the message into a text file.
2. Type a cryptic command to encrypt it with that public key.
3. Attach the file to a message to that person. Optionally doing this on a different box passed through a data diode if I was worried about GPG box compromised. Just using Linux for now.
4. Receiving works other way where I download an encrypted file that I run a decryption command on.
So, that's simple. How to get started and what commands to use? I installed GPG first. One look at the man page made me hit Google instead. I found a cheat sheet, identified the minimal commands necessary, and compared them against the man page. Saw what seemed to be right stuff but that man page was horrible. Looked at a bunch of other sources online with varying trustworthiness to see if they had same commands. Seemed like I had the right ones. I was also warned the key gen phase could take a long time so I just ignored that usability problem that stomped the OP so much. I was warned after all.
The key generated. Messages sent and received well. Only thing left was tediously typing my new buddy's email into the box with every encryption. As others came up, I was having to remember more email addresses. Time to automate that shit with a front end that worked on any system I needed. Also, without remembering how to program.
I recalled Python was easy. So, I'd need a data structure for a list of (alias, email) pairs, basic operations on text for maybe substitution, input, conditionals, ability to print them, and spawn function of some kind. Python reference gave me all I need which I tested each to be sure then composed them with tests. End result was a Python script with the list of alias/emails in it like a config file where I could just add people to the script itself. Then, I run the script on the text message with it asking which of a listed group of people to send it to. I type in number or name for it to run command automatically. Then, I verify by eye the new file looks like gibberish and attach it to the email.
End result was that I had GPG for friends using it, I figured out how to use it with fair degree of trustworthiness, and I automated the annoying part with less than beginner's knowledge of scripting. This shows GPG is way less hard than it appears to be. Although I sure could use a great front-end to smooth over all this. I'm sure any half-ass programmer could create one given what I did in that state. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But: why bother? Email is just one of dozens of messaging systems available to Internet users. No, it's not. It's the only widely available, decentralized system, with which you can send to anyone, if you know the address. None of the big ones is this open. XMPP tried to address this and failed; now Matrix is trying again.
I feel like Matrix may be the way forward; it also looks like it's possible to build an email-like interface on top of it. But currently, federated Matrix leaks metadata, so that's a problem.
It's also fast to setup. Took me about 30 minutes to set up a homeserver and host a customized riot client to use it.
It's not completely decentralized yet, and you can only use from a fixed list of identity servers. Although you can set up your own synapse node, you can't yet use it along with the centralized identity servers.
The reason they give for not decentralizing the identity servers yet is to avoid spam. But they plan to make them decentralized in the future, so at that point it would completely be like email.
I'm not sure I buy this. Protonmail has a very polished UI that's dead simple enough for technical people and non-technical people alike: https://protonmail.com
does this only work if both parties have @protonmail.com ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But: why bother? Email is just one of dozens of messaging systems available to Internet users. No, it's not. It's the only widely available, decentralized system, with which you can send to anyone, if you know the address. None of the big ones is this open. XMPP tried to address this and failed; now Matrix is trying again.
I feel like Matrix may be the way forward; it also looks like it's possible to build an email-like interface on top of it. But currently, federated Matrix leaks metadata, so that's a problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Better to move sensitive conversations to things like Signal, WhatsApp, or Wire Really? Come on! WhatsApp is owned by a company whose business is done by retrieving all the information it can from users and by tracking their behaviors.
Funny how it wasn't until after they were acquired by that company that they began the project to adopt the protocol that would make reading their messages cryptographically hard. It's almost as if you can't start from some tiny set of first principles about the world and use it to reason through any problem in a message board comment.
Perhaps you don't remember this:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/28/whatsapp-...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/17/facebook-...
Can't parse your second sentence, sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And if you were aware that a state-level actor is targeting you, you'd be using a programmable, self-contained HSM for all sensitive computation. This is a topic I'm working on actually.
You mis-spelled "iphone."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again: the Venn diagram between people who want encryption and people who need encryption has very little overlap. And, thankfully, modern secure messaging systems work for both populations.
Which also applies to the distributed systems - email, in context of this particular discussion. Same logic here: email works for both. And doesn't apply to IM systems, because it's just not possible for Whatsapp user to contact Signal user and invite Wire user in a group. IM app fatigue is a real problem. Or maybe it's just that nearly everyone in my bubble has load of apps just to contact all their peers.
Email yes, encrypted email, no. That's the whole point. A decentralized system, as nice as it is in theory requires participation to enable widespread change. You cannot just say "now we all encrypt email" and know that everyone does. But you can change the transport mechanism of a centralized system to something encrypted and know that it works for all participants, even for those that don't care or don't know how to do it themselves.
It's a trade-off. Again.