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

151–160 of 214 posts

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#151

Post by DanBC »

mempko wrote: post #85
kostyakow wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Github maintained by someone with a troll username? >Comments like this >> IMPORTANT: release two major sanctioned UIs, one for autists, one with inbuilt support for the previous list so that plebs can't get confused with setting it up and autists don't complain about it getting in their way. de geso > I would suggest a "Advanced options" where the autists can rejoice with all kinds of options (and it doesn't fright…

People have evolved to communicate with identities. Never in history have people communicated on such a large scale anonymously. To say it is "true nature of people" is interesting because anon communication isn't natural at all.

The Japanese founder of 2ch said that anonymity was to allow people the freedom to say what they really meant. (Wikipedia.)

> A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other. If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#153

Post by shin_lao »

tptacek wrote: post #107
shin_lao wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DH is zero-knowledge in the sense that the two peers have no knowledge of each other, and yet share a knowledge at the end. Again, I admit my word usage is a little bit liberal, but although I haven't done serious crypto for a couple of years now, I have the strange feeling you are nitpicking. Is it just a feeling? :) I'm referring to this paper: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00124891 Curiously, althou…

That's not what "zero knowledge" means. In the context of STS or, more generally, DH, a ZKP is something you'd add after DH, to verify that one party or the other had arrived at the expected DH result. I don't think I'm nitpicking: I see where you're coming from but I think you might be entirely wrong. I don't know what it means to "prefer" DLP crypto. Over what? I just don't understand what you're trying to say with…

Well, if you exchange your keys via DH and start using that key to cipher the communication, you're going to find out very soon if you exchanged the key properly, won't you?

In essence, once you've agreed on a key you won't keep it to yourself (although you could, in theory). But am I missing the point? Are we talking about two different things? I'm talking about ZK from a mathematical point of view, you know, the cavern, the treasure, the two paths... (if you know this layman example about ZK)

Unfortunately I cannot go into details, but what I meant about my preference for DLP is that although I was mathematically more attracted to DLP based algorithms (when it came to asymmetric cryptography) I didn't really have the chance to "play" with them and spent more time with RSA.

So it's probable my knowledge of the DH key exchange algorithm is imperfect and last time I wrote crypto it was very mundane (it was using RC4, that's saying a lot!), so maybe I should just refrain from commenting about crypto.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#154

Post by DanBC »

kostyakow wrote: post #34
DanBC wrote: post #8

Github maintained by someone with a troll username? Comments like this: > IMPORTANT: release two major sanctioned UIs, one for autists, one with inbuilt support for the previous list so that plebs can't get confused with setting it up and autists don't complain about it getting in their way. de geso > I would suggest a "Advanced options" where the autists can rejoice with all kinds of options (and it doesn't frighten…

>Github maintained by someone with a troll username? >Comments like this >> IMPORTANT: release two major sanctioned UIs, one for autists, one with inbuilt support for the previous list so that plebs can't get confused with setting it up and autists don't complain about it getting in their way. de geso > I would suggest a "Advanced options" where the autists can rejoice with all kinds of options (and it doesn't fright…

> The project originated from 4chan's /g/ (technology) board. It works differently from Reddit and HN, since there's no karma, and the comments are anonymous.

Thanks for this.

I was there in rec.arts.anime.misc with m00t in 2002 when he decided to set up 4chan.

"User was banned for this post", in red, is my idea. "Bring back snacks" is my meme. I had the 10,000 GET. I created the first C-C-C-Combo! post, but not the first C-C-C-Combo Breaker! post. I'm still in contact with Cracky-Chan. I am a BBCode master, and I have read my SICP today. I helped keep the pool closed; I hate GaiaFusers nearly as much as I hate furries. I don't visit 4chan much anymore because, you know, newfguys, but I hope you kids are enjoying the place and not stinking it up too much. :-p

> We were working on this for only about a month,

I tend to be really harsh on crypto projects. Please, ignore anything I say. There are, however, some experts posting in this thread and I hope their advice is useful.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#155

Post by banachtarski »

pigscantfly wrote: post #140
banachtarski wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I like admitting that you are wrong instead of saying "meh I didn't actually care about this."

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#156

Post by zokier »

e1ven wrote: post #132
spacelizard wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 update…

False sense of security can be even more dangerous.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#157

Post by fauxpad »

moneyrich2 wrote: post #93
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…

hamachi kicked ass :D

This is certainly a crucial point to make here, a fact which immediately won empathy from me

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#158

Post by napoleond »

jnbiche wrote: post #108
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…

Congrats on the progress made so far. I'm eager to see how things shape up. Would love to see a community project analogous to this one develop in the e-mail space since too many users find PGP to be cumbersome, despite some very nice implementations. Bitmessage and I2P's bote are both very interesting, but the prior project needs more experienced security people working on it (and some serious refactoring), and the…

Would love to see a community project analogous to this one develop in the e-mail space since too many users find PGP to be cumbersome, despite some very nice implementations.

We're on it! https://parley.co will be entering pre-beta later this week. Maybe not technically a "community project" because it's being built by a company that is at least partly motivated by profit, but the whole thing is BSD-licensed so people can do whatever they want with it.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#159

Post by baddox »

tptacek wrote: post #63
Daiz wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I don't see the concept being so unique and original that someone else couldn't have come up with it independently, and frankly the Tox logo has a much nicer balance (in the Tox logo, the person/keyhole works much better, whereas in yours it doesn't really work as a "keyhole" in my opinion) than the versions you linked. EDIT: The logo was originally made in /gd/ (4chan's graphic design board), and since the…

Strong disagree. That was a clever logo and one I hadn't seen before.

People invented calculus independently at the same time.

Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone

#160

Post by williamcotton »

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…

Neither of you guys invented these concepts:

1.) Using a padlock to represent computer security.

2.) Using a cartoon chat bubble to represent a way to chat on your computer.

3.) Using a little oval on top of a bigger oval to represent a person.

Is it really that much of a stretch to combine the three? I would think that this concept would be pretty standard output from someone with even a moderate amount of visual communication skills.

It's a rather simple visual sentence and I can easily imagine quite a few people having come up with this concept.

Please realize that both logos are built on top of an already existing visual language and that neither of you are really all that original to begin with.

Post reply on HN