81–90 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp was selling you access to your account. Element is selling you access to an instance which you can share with as many users as you want.
The pricing page says you can only share it with 5 users for the $10/month package. Am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if it's P2P, you still need TURN servers because participants might be behind NAT that are hard to pierce through. This basically means you're proxying the full video traffic between both participants.
Have you had success with encrypting TURN servers? In trying to host my own Matrix server and have E2E encryption for texts, video, and voice, I found that video/voice had to be disabled as Let's Encrypt and SSL weren't compatible.
Setting up STUN and TURN is a real pain, though, if you run into any issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They revoked keys of users without giving users a choice, ability to save, backup user messages etc. It is a company with operations, engineering and business ran by amateurs that do not understand the foundation of any user facing business - when you have a choice between not destroying user data and devising a method to handle a situation even if it costs you and losing user data, you do the first. Every single per…
>As we had to log out all users from matrix.org, if you do not have backups of your encryption keys you will not be able to read your encrypted conversation history. However, if you use server-side encryption key backup (the default in Riot these days) or take manual key backups, you’ll be okay. I'm not defending them, in fact I prefer XMPP+OMEMO (or I would if I had someone people to talk to). But it seems like the…
That is not a decision for them to make, rather that is a decision for their users to make. Their inability to understand that the mantra of a company that happen to carry user data is "Shall not lose user's data" means the are not tall enough to take the ride.
> If you're criticizing about the hack in general, though, 100% agreed.
That's a separate topic. Their operational security was atrocious, which even by itself should be a reason why one should highly discount their hosted promises but to me inability to understand that under no circumstances they can choose to destroy user's data trumps it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would phrase that as 'server instance.' Their language like "you’re sharing minimal infrastructure with anyone else" does reinforce the idea they mean physical server. Maybe "dedicated" and "infrastructure" are being abstracted into meaninglessness as cloud computing matures.
“Fully managed, dedicated server” absolutely means that you get your own hardware. If they are using it to mean a virtual server, that seems incredibly dishonest to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you had success with encrypting TURN servers? In trying to host my own Matrix server and have E2E encryption for texts, video, and voice, I found that video/voice had to be disabled as Let's Encrypt and SSL weren't compatible.
You definitely can make it work with Let's Encrypt, that shouldn't disturb anything. Setting up STUN and TURN is a real pain, though, if you run into any issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was on their Patreon for a while, but had to hop off because of financial fun. Sadly none of the rewards are updated and the flair is no longer given out; at this point it makes sense to just see it as a donation.
Actually, the flair still seems to be given out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>As we had to log out all users from matrix.org, if you do not have backups of your encryption keys you will not be able to read your encrypted conversation history. However, if you use server-side encryption key backup (the default in Riot these days) or take manual key backups, you’ll be okay. I'm not defending them, in fact I prefer XMPP+OMEMO (or I would if I had someone people to talk to). But it seems like the…
> Keep in mind that this was a bad hack and IMO they made the right decision to revoke keys (alternative is possible leak of every message, ever sent on their platform) but I don't like that it came to that. Do you think they should not have revoked keys, and if so why? That is not a decision for them to make, rather that is a decision for their users to make. Their inability to understand that the mantra of a compan…
At which point the data could be taken and leaked. That would end the company, protocol, and platform forever.
>Their inability to understand that the mantra of a company that happen to carry user data is "Shall not lose user's data" means the are not tall enough to take the ride.
I think having lost data is better than having it stolen and lost...
>That's a separate topic. Their operational security was atrocious, which even by itself should be a reason why one should highly discount their hosted promises but to me inability to understand that under no circumstances they can choose to destroy user's data trumps it.
I concur. Again, not arguing against that there were significant failures, missteps, and mistakes that led to this. But saying "the users should have the choice" simply would have opened up the risk of a more serious attack at the whim of whoever was doing the attack...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A 5 person Signal group would even have higher security. Why is it higher security?
Fewer ways for it to be misconfigured? In Matrix you've got to remember to turn on the encryption, and verify each of your clients. At least that's my understanding, maybe that is out of date.
While I love Matrix and support their mission, this pricing is quite a bit steep, as well as the 5-person limit being too restricting. They will price out large majority of people who actually could/would want to switch.
$5 per month is a big entry cost. And I am not sure how well this price will work in the long run when people begin using the server a lot. Perhaps pricing based on message throughput or used storage capacity would make for an easier and fairer entry.