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

Signal Foundation

signal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 298 posts

Re: Signal Foundation

#241

Post by Zhyl »

nickik wrote: post #64
zapita wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't keybase a for-profit startup leveraging advances in cryptography to build yet another social network?

Keybase is not really a social network. It feels much more like a sort PKI with a Slack client on top of it. The focus seems very much on Teams. However they could go into more of a social network direction, the features are basically there.

Keybase is an amazing idea which seems to be trapped by the current zeitgeist. It implements smooth and intuitive PKI via a command line, a mobile app and a web/electron app and seem to be rolling it out as a slack and/or dropbox alternative which are pretty solid use cases.

The downsides are that it has a very cartoony 'silicon valley' type feel which is great for early adopters, but will be a significant barrier to enterprise and government customers who would otherwise be an absolute prime market for easy-to-implement, easy-to-administrate PKI.

It also has a very start-up oriented world view in terms of 'teams'. There would be great call for generic group management. I would love to have some stakeholder management across some projects where we could have a shared space, but also have separate areas for client, supplier and subcontractors. Keybase kind of doesn't quite fit the need for privacy there, although it is so close to being exactly what is needed.

Bringing it back round to the social networking thing though - it feels kind of like it was inspired a lot by social networking. This would be a boon if it were to become a social network. It is absolutely a downside if they're looking for a wider remit.

Re: Signal Foundation

#242

Post by Zash »

dTal wrote: post #235
baby wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which sounds like it could be used to develop a federated protocol. I've heard there is an effort to do an RFC on the subject, but I'm not sure it uses the Signal protocols (for some reason), also there are two of them (I'm confused): * https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-mls-protocol-00 * https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omara-mls-architecture-01

Do you consider SMS a federated protocol? https://silence.im/

SMS is federated, users of one providers can send messages to users of a different provider. Same with phone calls. Becoming a telephony provider probably takes a bit more investment than with some random Internet based service.

Re: Signal Foundation

#243

Post by distances »

mapgrep wrote: post #71

This is very very good news. As a heavy Signal user, from where I sit I personally see the following clear needs: -Better group support. Right now, to do a group in Signal you have to name the group, which makes it kind of a pain to create ad hoc quick groups. I'm forever naming them "John Sue Bill" or "Jane Roger Amanda". iMessage, by contrast, just automatically makes a group without a name. You get a thread for th…

This may sound silly, but:

- Stickers

I know many consider those to be annoying distractions, but in my experience stickers are the reason why many "normal" users prefer Telegram over WhatsApp.

Re: Signal Foundation

#244

Post by acct1771 »

tomcatfish wrote: post #124
acct1771 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, saying PGP has failed is like saying cryptocurrencies have failed.

There is no public interest in PGP from non-technicals

And the only reason Bitcoin is interesting is because "we" have effectively communicated, correctly or otherwise, that there's value in cryptocurrencies.

Re: Signal Foundation

#245

Post by acct1771 »

emodendroket wrote: post #165
acct1771 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, saying PGP has failed is like saying cryptocurrencies have failed.

Considering the diversity of opinions on cryptocurrencies, this post leaves me with no idea what you think about PGP.

The verdict is still out on both, because, as a society, we aren't ready to make use of them/the UX haven't been made easy enough for the unwashed masses yet.

Re: Signal Foundation

#247

Post by distances »

anonytrary wrote: post #228
Zhenya wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While whatsapp messages are, apparently, e2e encrypted - your phonebook and metadata are slurped up by facebook. Signal does not have that goal and have been shown by courts documents to not store the metadata.

The Signal app asks for a ton of permissions. Apparently this isn't decentralized either, so how is it different than Facebook? Did they prove it was mathematically hard/impossible for them to see any of the (meta)data? Have they proven that they are a 100% oblivious broker?

The courts not getting any data, as parent just mentioned, is very strong proof for that.

Re: Signal Foundation

#248

Post by lettergram »

Zhyl wrote: post #241
nickik wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keybase is not really a social network. It feels much more like a sort PKI with a Slack client on top of it. The focus seems very much on Teams. However they could go into more of a social network direction, the features are basically there.

Keybase is an amazing idea which seems to be trapped by the current zeitgeist. It implements smooth and intuitive PKI via a command line, a mobile app and a web/electron app and seem to be rolling it out as a slack and/or dropbox alternative which are pretty solid use cases. The downsides are that it has a very cartoony 'silicon valley' type feel which is great for early adopters, but will be a significant barrier to…

Idk if they realized what they had... They don't even need their own chat client - I implemented an example where I could encrypt and decrypt messages automatically to anyone, over any web based client:

http://lettergram.github.io/AnyCrypt/

(Current version in repo doesn't automatically encrypt, but tests show it's straight forward).

I think that's the real power, the centralized authority of "you are X, with public key Y"

Re: Signal Foundation

#249

Post by Asdfbla »

acct1771 wrote: post #244
tomcatfish wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no public interest in PGP from non-technicals

And the only reason Bitcoin is interesting is because "we" have effectively communicated, correctly or otherwise, that there's value in cryptocurrencies.

The overwhelming majority of people use Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies through exchanges, they have no interest or knowledge of technical details. So it's not like technical communication has won here, more like greed and ease of use.

Re: Signal Foundation

#250

Post by spappal »

catamorphismic wrote: post #238
eadmund wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agreed on all of these (the lack of search, in particular) is just atrocious. I'd also like to see: - Improved export functionality on all platforms :: I should be able to export my chats in some readable format from any client. - More clients :: I should be able to read my Signal messages within emacs. - Support for non-phone-number identifiers :: I shouldn't need to purchase a new phone number in order t…

> There are ways to discover mutual contacts privately. Such as? I don't have the URL handy but the Signal team did investigate the literature and known techniques for this a few years ago and found them to be nonviable.

This is their latest blog post on the topic: https://signal.org/blog/private-contact-discovery/
Post reply on HN