Live data from Hacker News

Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

confer.to

41–50 of 180 posts

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#41
post #20

"trusted execution environment" != end-to-end encryption The entire point of E2EE is that both "ends" need to be fully under your control.

This is false.

From Wikipedia: "End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a method of implementing a secure communication system where only the sender and intended recipient can read the messages."

Both ends do not need to be under your control for E2EE.

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#42

Get a fun error message on debian 13 with firefox v140: "This application requires passkey with PRF extension support for secure encryption key storage. Your browser or device doesn't support these advanced features.Please use Chrome 116+, Firefox 139+, or Edge 141+ on a device with platform authentication (Face ID, Touch ID, Windows Hello, etc.)."

Great new way to lock out potential new users. I bet large part of users interested in privacy are using Linux and some fork of Firefox.

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#43

> Advanced Passkey Features Required > This application requires passkey with PRF extension support for secure encryption key storage. Your browser or device doesn't support these advanced features. > Please use Chrome 116+, Firefox 139+, or Edge 141+ on a device with platform authentication (Face ID, Touch ID, Windows Hello, etc.). (Running Chrome 143) So... does this just not support desktops without overpriced web…

Windows Hello should work fine just by PIN, it's the platform authentication part that's important, not the way you unlock it

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#44
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it is more like e2teee, but I think there is really no alternative beyond TEE + anonymization. Privacy people want it locally, but it is 5 to 10 years away (or never, if the current economics works, there is no need to reverse the trend).

> ... 5 to 10 years away (or never, if the current economics works... Think PCs in 5y to 10y that can run SoTA multi-modal LLMs (cf Mac Pro) will cost as much as cars do, and I reckon folks will buy it.

ISTM that most people would rather give away their privacy than pay even a single cent for most things.

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#45
post #23
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like Confer is hosting its own inference: https://confer.to/blog/2026/01/private-inference/ > LLMs are fundamentally stateless—input in, output out—which makes them ideal for this environment. For Confer, we run inference inside a confidential VM. Your prompts are encrypted from your device directly into the TEE using Noise Pipes, processed there, and responses are encrypted back. The host never sees plaintext.…

> Looks like Confer is hosting its own inference Even so, you're still exposing your data to Confer, and so you have to trust them that they'll behave as you want. That's a security problem that Confer doesn't help with. I'm not saying Confer isn't useful, though. e2ee is very useful. But it isn't enough to make me feel comfortable.

> you're still exposing your data to Confer

They use a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_execution_environment and iiuc claim that your client can confirm (attest) that the code they run doesn't leak your data, see https://confer.to/blog/2026/01/private-inference/

So you should be able to run https://github.com/conferlabs/confer-image yourself and get a hash of that and then confer.to will send you that same hash, but now it's been signed by Intel I guess? to tell you that yes not only did confer.to send you that hash, but that hash is indeed a hash of what's running inside the Trusted Execution Environment.

I feel like this needs diagrams.

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#47
post #10

I don't agree that this is end to end encrypted. For example, a compromise of the TEE would mean your data is exposed. In a truly end to end encrypted system, I wouldn't expect a server side compromise to be able to expose my data. This is similar to the weasely language Google is now using with the Magic Cue feature ever since Android 16 QPR 1. When it launched, it was local only -- now it's local and in the cloud "…

[deleted]

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#49
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looks like Confer is hosting its own inference Even so, you're still exposing your data to Confer, and so you have to trust them that they'll behave as you want. That's a security problem that Confer doesn't help with. I'm not saying Confer isn't useful, though. e2ee is very useful. But it isn't enough to make me feel comfortable.

> you're still exposing your data to Confer They use a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_execution_environment and iiuc claim that your client can confirm (attest) that the code they run doesn't leak your data, see https://confer.to/blog/2026/01/private-inference/ So you should be able to run https://github.com/conferlabs/confer-image yourself and get a hash of that and then confer.to will send you that same hash…

As I read it, the attestation is simply that the server is running a particular kernel and application in the Secure Enclave using the hardware’s certification. That does not attest that there is no sidechannel. If exfiltration from the TEE is achieved, the attestation will not change.

To put it another way, I am quite sure that a sufficiently skilled (or privileged: how do you know the manufacturer is not keeping copies of these hardware keys?) team could sit down with one of these enclave modules and figure out how to get the memory image (or whatever) out without altering the attested signature.

Re: Confer – End to end encrypted AI chat

#50
Interestingly the confer image on GitHub doesn’t seem to include in the attestation the model weights (they seem loaded from a mounted ext4 disk without dm-verity). Probably this doesn’t compromise the privacy of the communication (as long as the model format is not containing any executable part) but it exposes users to a “model swapping” attack, where the confer operator makes a user talk to an “evil” model without they can notice it. Such evil model may be fine tuned to provide some specifically crafted output to the user. Authenticating the model seems important, maybe it is done at another level of the stack?
Post reply on HN