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

Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

skypeopenletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 70 posts

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#11

Post by magikarp »

avar wrote: post #7

Open comment to Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics: You're not going to get what you want by piggy-backing on Microsoft's proprietary platform. Specifically if you're an Internet Activists you shouldn't be relying on some company's proprietary tool for disguising your communications. There's plenty of open and secure VoIP clients which coupled with open encryption standards, VPN's etc. will suit your purpo…

If you're someone who reads Hacker News then sure, you already know better than to rely on a closed platform. But many in Syria don't.

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#12

Post by pieter »

nakedrobot2 wrote: post #6

Has there been any confirmation of the very juicy rumor about Skype and the NSA? Brieftly it is this: The NSA put out a $1 billion RFP to crack the encryption of skype - their inability to listen in on this huge communication channel was really a bummer for the NSA. Microsoft says "Hmm" and buys Skype for $8 billion, re-engineers the archtecture of Skype so that it is centralized rather than P2P and easily decrypted…

Skype has always relied on a central authentication server, which means that anyone with control of that server would be able to MITM any conversation. The recent changes of ownership and centralization of the service have nothing to do with this. Presumably the US government has been able to tap into any Skype conversation they want for a long time.

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#13

Post by phillc73 »

I have searched and searched for an alternative to Skype, but so far have mostly failed.

My situation:

- I use Linux on all my desktops/laptops.

- I have an Android phone.

- My mobile phone bill is usually in excess of £100 per month.

- I am usually located in the UK, sometimes elsewhere but almost never in the US.

My use cases:

- I want to make cheap calls to mobile phone numbers in Ireland, Austria and Australia

- I want to make landline calls to the same countries.

- I want to send SMS messages to the same countries.

- I want to make free person to person VOIP calls.

- I want to make video calls.

- Security and privacy is a factor.

Currently, I have Skype working reasonably well on my 64-bit Debian based Linux machines. However, call quality can be very patchy when calling mobile phone numbers. Video quality is often poor and the call drops out when communicating with others in Australia.

I have tried Ekiga, Jitsi, SflPhone and a few others. I have a Diamondcard.us account for making chargeable calls. Almost always the call-out quality of these services is poor. I've been told it sounds like "I'm talking through a pillow."

I have been using Google Voice recently. It does work from my UK registered Google Account for making calls to mobile phones and landlines. The call quality is very good. The mobile phone pricing is generally a little more expensive than Skype. Unfortunately, landline calls are significantly more expensive that Skype and the full Google Voice experience (SMS messages, registering a number and thus using on my Android device) isn't available outside the US.

Is there any other single unified service worth considering, which does meet at least the majority of my use cases?

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#16

Post by pbhjpbhj »

lampe wrote: post #5
nodata wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skype is popular because it just worked, even through funky firewalls. The replacement would need to be better than Skype to gain traction with non-technical users.

skype just uses an http tunnel cause mostly the 80 port is open so no magic here(it does some more tricks but this is on). I dont think skype is easy just look at the UI... i dont like skype for linux it never works on my laptop...

I'm not keen on some of the recent changes to Skype but I don't really consider "Skype for Linux" to actually be Skype. Skype is actually the only reason beyond dev testing that I keep MS Windows.

Skype for Linux is the only software I've installed in at least 8 years, AFAIR, that has crashed my desktop session.

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#17

Post by ef4 »

lampe wrote: post #5
nodata wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skype is popular because it just worked, even through funky firewalls. The replacement would need to be better than Skype to gain traction with non-technical users.

skype just uses an http tunnel cause mostly the 80 port is open so no magic here(it does some more tricks but this is on). I dont think skype is easy just look at the UI... i dont like skype for linux it never works on my laptop...

It's a bit smarter than just using an http tunnel.

Skype is capable of direct client-to-client connections, despite intervening NAT. It's pretty clever -- with the server's help as coordinator, the clients both initiate the connection, causing their own NAT routers to accept the inbound packets from the other side.

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#18

Post by pandog »

pieter wrote: post #12
nakedrobot2 wrote: post #6

Has there been any confirmation of the very juicy rumor about Skype and the NSA? Brieftly it is this: The NSA put out a $1 billion RFP to crack the encryption of skype - their inability to listen in on this huge communication channel was really a bummer for the NSA. Microsoft says "Hmm" and buys Skype for $8 billion, re-engineers the archtecture of Skype so that it is centralized rather than P2P and easily decrypted…

Skype has always relied on a central authentication server, which means that anyone with control of that server would be able to MITM any conversation. The recent changes of ownership and centralization of the service have nothing to do with this. Presumably the US government has been able to tap into any Skype conversation they want for a long time.

I'm not sure if it makes it easier to listen in on calls but Microsoft have made changes to the skype infrastructure: http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/skype-replaces-p2p-s...

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#19

Post by gesman »

nakedrobot2 wrote: post #6

Has there been any confirmation of the very juicy rumor about Skype and the NSA? Brieftly it is this: The NSA put out a $1 billion RFP to crack the encryption of skype - their inability to listen in on this huge communication channel was really a bummer for the NSA. Microsoft says "Hmm" and buys Skype for $8 billion, re-engineers the archtecture of Skype so that it is centralized rather than P2P and easily decrypted…

So i wonder if good chunk of this $8B purchase price comes back to MSFT via "strategic investments" and "partnerships" from "interested parties"

Re: Open Letter to Skype from Internet Activists, Journalists and Academics

#20

Post by 0x0 »

ef4 wrote: post #17
lampe wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

skype just uses an http tunnel cause mostly the 80 port is open so no magic here(it does some more tricks but this is on). I dont think skype is easy just look at the UI... i dont like skype for linux it never works on my laptop...

It's a bit smarter than just using an http tunnel. Skype is capable of direct client-to-client connections, despite intervening NAT. It's pretty clever -- with the server's help as coordinator, the clients both initiate the connection, causing their own NAT routers to accept the inbound packets from the other side.

That's also called STUN, I believe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STUN (or probably a variant)
Post reply on HN