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

Tox: secure messaging for everyone

tox.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 214 posts

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#131

Post by abcd_f »

Kasuto wrote: post #122
latitude wrote: post #47

Oh, I see you helped yourselves to my Secure Chat logo - http://dribbble.com/shots/479881-Secure-Chat http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288 https://www.google.ca/search?q=secure+chat+logo - first page hit too Not cool at all, "cool guys around the world". -- (edit) Regardless of whether this was copied, over-inspired or independently conceived (but let's be realistic here), the generally accepted rule of the game…

Stop being a baby. Someone even commented on your post that they had the same idea months ago. But instead of whining about it, he shrugged it off and said "Great minds must think alike." The current Tox logo wasn't even the first proposed logo with the chat bubble/padlock idea. There were a lot of other ones. People were taking the idea from other logos and improving it. That's innovation. You weren't the first one…

It came from the 4chan side.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#132

Post by e1ven »

spacelizard wrote: post #129
kostyakow wrote: post #21

Tox aims to be a secure replacement for Skype. There's several other similar projects, but they are usually hard to set up and use for an average user. Tox is FLOS software developed by community, and currently licensed under GPLv3. We are considering changing the license to something more permissive, so it would be possible to put it on the App & Win8 Stores. Currently, it is in really early stages of development. B…

I don't see the point of changing to a more permissive license just to get on the iOS and WP8 app stores. Those devices are all compromised to begin with.

When trying to create a secure network, you're constantly going to be dealing with tradeoffs between enabling communication, and ensuring you can actually talk with people.

You're right that iOS isn't a completely secure OS.. But using a secure app on iOS is better than using regular SMS going through AT&T.

Perfect is very difficult to achieve here- Most PCs have nonfree a BIOS, and even then, many CPUs can be updated by encrypted updates from the manufacturer.

It very well might be possible to ensure that your machine isn't vulnerable... But you're not going to have many people to talk to.

I think the tradeoff for having an iOS app is worth it. It puts the users of the iOS app (and those talking to them) a bit more at risk, but doesn't compromise the whole network.

Let them make that tradeoff. It's better than talking to an empty room.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#133

Post by Craigpd »

loumf wrote: post #130
Craigpd wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'm quite sure that the logo's in the link below are intended to be used or are IN use. So, tell me, why are these companies with many highly experienced legal advisers not fighting eachother over a logo? http://img.ctrlv.in/img/51f6b5b849ebf.jpg

You can trademark using a round M for burgers, but that doesn't get you the trademark for banks. Witness Apple Records and Apple Computers. In this case, the products/ideas are straight-up competitors.

Only Apple go so far as to take such petty things to court. Most of their law suits can be generalised as "It looks similar from this side of the room"

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#134

Post by ceol »

unknownian wrote: post #88
jessaustin wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides, the icon was made by an anonymous person so it's not really like we can blame anyone. Isn't that convenient?

Because we made this project just to violate copyright. Sure thing.

I think their point was that the person who made the icon is anonymous, so it's harder to blame and therefor benefits you. Not that you had that goal in mind to begin with.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#135

Post by pyre »

dkhenry wrote: post #120

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if your intent is to get around NSA snooping this doesn't do that. All you have really done is made sure that your communications are target for closer scrutiny. Remember I don't care _what_ you say I care _who_ your saying it to. Once I know who is talking to who and which person might be a good source of information there are much easier ways to get that information then try…

You lack imagination. :P

If the NSA is collecting everything, then it's possible to go back in time once you become a person of interest. This doesn't necessarily help you if you are actively planning something that the government is interested in, but if you become a political opponent to the NSA, they could look into your past for skeletons to blackmail you with. Who you are talking to may not give them enough information to do anything without the content of the conversations.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#136

Post by dpenning »

syjer wrote: post #127
dpenning wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you understood what MITM(man in the middle attacks) actually means. I will give you a high level example of what he is talking about. your software displays a public key to perform encryption. what 'the NSA' can do is put a proxy (or use your isp) in between you and the person you are sending data to. Then they can pose as the person you are sending data to by hosting their own public key to both you…

If I understood their code/doc, the public keys must be exchanged out of band. So how could the proxy pass for another person?

I'm not sure what you mean by out of band

If you mean that it is communicated over TCP/IP(what i gathered from reading the doc), what is stopping someone who has access to whatever is connected to your IP from redirecting traffic to that port in order to do what was already discussed.

if you mean that it is shared in person off the internet, then what is the point of this program. Diffe Hellman, ECC, zero Knowledge proofs are all dependent on the discrete log problem being hard, so you might as well just start broadcasting to their ip with the key that they gave you in person instead of going through the trouble(and increase in vulnerability) of trying to establish that the person is who they say they are. maybe I'm wrong but I don't think that math is wrong.

in any case, I feel like the problem for this program stems from the fact that validating the IP address of the person is much more complicated than it seems. Its pretty much the reason centralized databases are needed for connections between people(those are bad things in our world now).

this is pretty much what is needed for this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#138

Post by justarandomanon »

latitude wrote: post #128
Daiz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as we know, said project only exists in latitude's mind, and the only public information about it is that he may or may not still have plans for a "secure chat" program. I'd be hard-pressed to call that an "existing project", since for all practical purposes, it isn't.

You are asserting a made-up argument. Having an active public project behind a logo is not a necessary condition for not re-purposing the logo for another project. This particular concept just happens to be taken. Every good logo is trivial in retrospect, it's finding a strong concept that's a bitch. I looked at /gd/ thread and virtually all of it revolves around shaping a keyhole this way or that way. Then suddenly…

>Re-purposing the logo >recycle an existing logo No-one is re-purposing the logo. You are going out of your way to make it seem as if they have literally stolen your logo, when in reality, they have a similar design that is not a copy.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#139

Post by [deleted] »

latitude wrote: post #128
Daiz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as we know, said project only exists in latitude's mind, and the only public information about it is that he may or may not still have plans for a "secure chat" program. I'd be hard-pressed to call that an "existing project", since for all practical purposes, it isn't.

You are asserting a made-up argument. Having an active public project behind a logo is not a necessary condition for not re-purposing the logo for another project. This particular concept just happens to be taken. Every good logo is trivial in retrospect, it's finding a strong concept that's a bitch. I looked at /gd/ thread and virtually all of it revolves around shaping a keyhole this way or that way. Then suddenly…

[deleted]

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#140

Post by pigscantfly »

banachtarski wrote: post #72
tptacek wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not invested in this issue enough to argue about it. I look at a lot of systems like this and was struck by the novelty of the logo, is why I commented. Take that for whatever you think it's worth.

If you aren't invested, how can you open with "strong disagree." Seems like you're invested up to the point when you're wrong, which is a pattern I've observed on this site in general. Incidentally, your anecdotal "feelings" about whether something feels original or not make for a pretty weak argument.

Why should people invest past the point of being wrong? If someone proves you wrong, you should change your mind, not keep arguing just to save face.
Post reply on HN