Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery • Hacker News Board

Re: Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery

#21

Post by DerekRodriguez » Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

simplify wrote: post #19

imperiopolis wrote: post #2

Author here, happy to answer any questions! TL;DR we're sharing an open-source encryption key recovery protocol that provides high security coupled with a user-friendly design, to make encryption further accessible to larger numbers of people. What we've built leverages programmable HSMs, distributed cryptography, and a user-friendly PIN-based recovery process to simplify key recovery without compromising security.

Juicebox's design of distributing secrets to n independent services sounds similar to Lit Protocol's threshold signature schemes. Is this in the same problem space or no?

It's the same space but most "solutions" in the space (like Lit Protocol) are actually custodial solutions parading as non-custodial. If you look closer at Lit Protocol, you will see that their nodes are unknown and unamed providers. Reading between the lines, it's just Lit hosting everything.

Re: Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery

#22

Post by dsneider » Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 5:31 PM UTC

DerekRodriguez wrote: post #21

simplify wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Juicebox's design of distributing secrets to n independent services sounds similar to Lit Protocol's threshold signature schemes. Is this in the same problem space or no?

It's the same space but most "solutions" in the space (like Lit Protocol) are actually custodial solutions parading as non-custodial. If you look closer at Lit Protocol, you will see that their nodes are unknown and unamed providers. Reading between the lines, it's just Lit hosting everything.

[dead]

Re: Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery

#23

Post by DerekRodriguez » Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 8:16 PM UTC

DerekRodriguez wrote: post #21

simplify wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Juicebox's design of distributing secrets to n independent services sounds similar to Lit Protocol's threshold signature schemes. Is this in the same problem space or no?

It's the same space but most "solutions" in the space (like Lit Protocol) are actually custodial solutions parading as non-custodial. If you look closer at Lit Protocol, you will see that their nodes are unknown and unamed providers. Reading between the lines, it's just Lit hosting everything.

EDIT to previous comment.

I actually just has a call with David from Lit Protocol. He patiently explained some of the nuanced pieces of Lit Protocol. A lot of this information is out there but they are moving so fast that it's hard to find. They are going to update their docs to make it more apparent but they have named their providers and appear to have a robust distributed network for key storage. Sorry for the hasty comment! It looks like Lit Protocol is one of the few non-custodial and resilient systems out there.

Re: Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery

#24

Post by bobbins42 » Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 8:29 PM UTC

DerekRodriguez wrote: post #20

It looks like an interesting approach but it seems conceptually complex and difficult for general users to consume. Can you explain how this differs from Gridlock which is an app that allows any level user create a network of storage devices using threshold cryptography?

People would integrate the client SDK into their applications and/or websites, it's not intended for end users to consume directly.

Re: Juicebox: Squeezing the hassle out of encryption key recovery

#25

Post by imperiopolis » Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 5:15 PM UTC

simplify wrote: post #19

imperiopolis wrote: post #2

Author here, happy to answer any questions! TL;DR we're sharing an open-source encryption key recovery protocol that provides high security coupled with a user-friendly design, to make encryption further accessible to larger numbers of people. What we've built leverages programmable HSMs, distributed cryptography, and a user-friendly PIN-based recovery process to simplify key recovery without compromising security.

Juicebox's design of distributing secrets to n independent services sounds similar to Lit Protocol's threshold signature schemes. Is this in the same problem space or no?

It’s a different problem space. Lit seems very focused on the MPC use case. They are using some similar, albeit less strong cryptographic techniques, but at their core (based on https://developer.litprotocol.com/v3/resources/how-it-works) they seem focused on MPC, blockchain applications, and more social key distribution.

Juicebox is very focused on how does an individual user manage their private key for one service, in a simple and user-friendly way, without any compromise in security. Think like your keys for Signal, WhatsApp, or any other E2EE service. It could also be used to manage a wallet private key for a noncustodial wallet.

As far as I can tell, Lit also manages all the nodes available to you (even if they don’t personally run them). There’s not a freedom for you to run your own nodes. This is the most important thing for this kind of distributed cryptography to be used securely, and something Juicebox supports by default – all our server code is available on GitHub and we encourage people to host their own realms to build networks with appropriate trust characteristics.