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

OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 231 posts

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#121

Post by imglorp »

adestefan wrote: post #77
toxik wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t hep but think that these seemingly numerous security flaws are a product of proprietary software development. There is the old “many eyes” idea for software bugs, but even on a standards level. Did Apple not send out an RFC? Isn’t this type of architectural level screw up exactly what you want to avoid with an RFC? I’m glad Apple are taking the privacy issue to heart, but for every inch we’ve won in privacy,…

The “many eyes” hypothesis is routinely debunked when severe security bugs are found in things like the Linux kernel that have been there for years. The same is true for standards that end up being fundamentally broken at later dates. In the end software and hardware is so overly complicated that we cannot currently build secure systems.

Debunked is a loaded term.

It's a tradeoff. The point is not MANY eyes, it's ANY eyes. Proprietary software has NO public eyes on it, zero, and the vendor must (1) report to you promptly when there's a new vulnerability, (2) produce a fix for it. Most vendors do neither until forced. How many undisclosed vulns does your vendor have? You'll never know.

Of course FLOSS has bugs, it's software, and ALL software has bugs. In the FLOSS case you know what everyone else knows, AND you can fix them, hire someone to do it, or choose not to use the software, all with that knowledge.

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#123

Post by checktheorder »

yoz-y wrote: post #19
filleokus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you mean something that is first party on both platforms? Otherwise SMS-like communication is obviously a solved issue (Signal/WhatsApp/Messenger et al). Does Android have something similar to iMessage?

> Does Android have something similar to iMessage? Kind of-ish. The RCS support is rolling out slowly. Of course there is a big difference in that RCS is not end to end encrypted. Also, there is nothing stopping Apple from implementing RCS as well, but I doubt they will do.

If Apple does adopt RCS, it's likely only as a fallback for iMessage, much like SMS today. And rather than Apple abandoning control over their messaging platform, I'd sooner bet on Apple releasing iMessage and Facetime for Android with a small subscription fee. Probably in the range of US$1-$2/month.

If there's one thing that Apple hates more than lost profits, it's handing over control of anything to carriers. Cheap-subscription iMessage/Facetime for Android would strangle RCS/Duo in the cradle and put a thumb in the eye of the carriers, while bringing in some steady and significant regular revenue. Let's not forget that Apple is already offering a subscription service on Android, Apple Music. They're not averse to the concept.

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#125

Post by rlpb »

oarsinsync wrote: post #116
rlpb wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this technology XMPP over Zeroconf ( https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0174.html ) has already existed for many years and at least previously has been trivial to enable on Ubuntu (I haven't tried it recently).

Requires an underlying network infrastructure to communicate over. Not quite the same as disparate peer to peer wireless mesh.

It works with ad-hoc wifi with no other infrastructure requirement or Internet connection, just the same as AirDrop. What more do you require to meet your definition of "disparate peer to peer wireless mesh"?

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#126

Post by davidmurdoch »

jbverschoor wrote: post #61
ymolodtsov wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enable what? Modern MacOS/iOS discourage you from disabiling Wi-Fi/Bluetooth anyway.

Some (more and more) people simply have it disabled, because 4G is faster and more reliable than wifi. And if you don't have any bluetooth devices, it will save some batterylife.

If you don't connect to a wifi network or any bluetooth devices then the battery savings are negligible, apparently.

https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-12271

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#127

Post by lostgame »

shimms wrote: post #37
micheljansen wrote: post #28

I wonder if it's more reliable than Apple's own implementation for MacOs. It used to be rock solid – and between iOS devices it still is – but between Macs I regularly have to switch both to "Search for an older Mac" to make them see each other, with no explanation why.

I was complaining about this with a coworker today. AirDrop 1 was flawless, since 2.0 it has been more often than not unreliable between Macs. I’d love to know if anyone knows the technical details about what caused this regression?

AirDrop 1 never worked for me, ever. With any combination of iOS or MacOS devices.

AirDrop 2 is still so finicky I just much rather put stuff on a USB key.

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#128

Post by aardshark »

nesadi wrote: post #53
ekwogefee wrote: post #34

Cross-platform local file transfer alternative with resumable file transfer: https://feem.io

This looks interesting. I'm a bit confused though. It seems like all the pricing plans are structured in a way that you're either only paying for iOS devices or for every kind of device except iOS ones. Does this mean transfers between iOS and non-iOS devices aren't supported? Or do I have to buy two plans in order to do it? edit: Okay, on a closer look, it seems like you do need two licenses, because the iOS license…

One of the limits is that you can't choose where your downloads go. Also, there are now ads on the unpaid version, which I think weren't there before.

I grew to dislike the app after running into the limits/ads. It does work, but it feels cheap and unpolished. There's no way I'd ever buy one of the pricing plans. I just don't feel like I would be getting my money's worth, especially when I could just go through a more involved solution.

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#129

Post by bennofs »

rlpb wrote: post #125
oarsinsync wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Requires an underlying network infrastructure to communicate over. Not quite the same as disparate peer to peer wireless mesh.

It works with ad-hoc wifi with no other infrastructure requirement or Internet connection, just the same as AirDrop. What more do you require to meet your definition of "disparate peer to peer wireless mesh"?

I think the point is that most clients probably don't configure the ad-hoc network for you? Or do they?

Re: OpenDrop: An Open Source AirDrop Implementation

#130

Post by Defenestresque »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #126
jbverschoor wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some (more and more) people simply have it disabled, because 4G is faster and more reliable than wifi. And if you don't have any bluetooth devices, it will save some batterylife.

If you don't connect to a wifi network or any bluetooth devices then the battery savings are negligible, apparently. https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-12271

This is very interesting to me. Does anyone know if there are material differences between Apple's and Android's implementations (in the battery savings sense)?
Post reply on HN