US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix • Hacker News Board

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#21

Post by karel-3d » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:12 PM UTC

Underpass9041 wrote: post #2

I’m not entirely sure why it matters that silos of messaging data exist, if it’s encrypted like Signal and WhatsApp the centralized model is far superior to an arbitrary and unknown number of parties receiving metadata about messaging. It might have been an easier case to make if Matrix wasn’t an uphill battle in terms of usability and performance.

Yes, working on a single centralised service is orders of magnitude easier than working on a decentralised service.

Especially when security and cryptography enters into the picture.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#22

Post by neilv » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:13 PM UTC

> The senators cite “a potentially more secure superior communications platform, known as Matrix, which is end-to-end encrypted by default, interoperable, not controlled by any one company, and widely used by multiple NATO allies.”

What's the current state of this open-ness?

Last I checked, it looked like Matrix was de facto mostly controlled by Element, even more than the Web browser is currently controlled by Google.

I'm not questioning intentions, and I'm aware that there are now a few other clients that support E2E. Just want an update on the reality. I don't want this to turn into a company with a Slack-like IPO, or an MS acquisition, and have the open-ness situation turn worse when we were waiting for it to turn better.

(Edit: Downvoters, did you think this is not an important question?)

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#23

Post by alwayslikethis » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:19 PM UTC

neilv wrote: post #22

> The senators cite “a potentially more secure superior communications platform, known as Matrix, which is end-to-end encrypted by default, interoperable, not controlled by any one company, and widely used by multiple NATO allies.” What's the current state of this open-ness? Last I checked, it looked like Matrix was de facto mostly controlled by Element, even more than the Web browser is currently controlled by Googl…

There are a few others that's pretty usable now. The difference is mainly in some more advanced features, such as spaces, threads, or SSO, but many people don't use these anyway. The company also doesn't control the network, as it's not difficult for any organization to spin up their own server. With some government investment it's not hard to imagine building a good competing client to Element.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#24

Post by dkasak » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:25 PM UTC

neilv wrote: post #22

> The senators cite “a potentially more secure superior communications platform, known as Matrix, which is end-to-end encrypted by default, interoperable, not controlled by any one company, and widely used by multiple NATO allies.” What's the current state of this open-ness? Last I checked, it looked like Matrix was de facto mostly controlled by Element, even more than the Web browser is currently controlled by Googl…

The Matrix.org Foundation has been steadily increasing its independence, with the recent introduction of the Governing Board (https://matrix.org/blog/2024/06/election-results/) which includes a mix of representatives from commercial players, the community, as well as Spec Core Team members and Guardians. Also, there are nowadays several Spec Core Team members who are not employed or contracted by Element, including some who are working for (near-)competitors in the space.

In other words, people are actively thinking of and implementing measures to mitigate the risk of accidentally/unintentionally backsliding into a closed standard.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#25

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:28 PM UTC

neilv wrote: post #22

> The senators cite “a potentially more secure superior communications platform, known as Matrix, which is end-to-end encrypted by default, interoperable, not controlled by any one company, and widely used by multiple NATO allies.” What's the current state of this open-ness? Last I checked, it looked like Matrix was de facto mostly controlled by Element, even more than the Web browser is currently controlled by Googl…

Currently it seems easy enough to write clients/servers using the protocol and the Synapse server can easily be forked (https://github.com/element-hq/synapse) if you find the need to do so. It does seem to be mainly worked on by Element, so there's always a risk that they might stop working on it and instead work on a closed source implementation. That does seem unlikely though as it goes against their goals and the idea of an open, secure communication standard.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#26

Post by Timshel » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 1:37 PM UTC

Underpass9041 wrote: post #2

I’m not entirely sure why it matters that silos of messaging data exist, if it’s encrypted like Signal and WhatsApp the centralized model is far superior to an arbitrary and unknown number of parties receiving metadata about messaging. It might have been an easier case to make if Matrix wasn’t an uphill battle in terms of usability and performance.

Encryption won't help you much if you are not the one hosting the server and they disappear ...

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#27

Post by mycall » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 2:06 PM UTC

Underpass9041 wrote: post #2

I’m not entirely sure why it matters that silos of messaging data exist, if it’s encrypted like Signal and WhatsApp the centralized model is far superior to an arbitrary and unknown number of parties receiving metadata about messaging. It might have been an easier case to make if Matrix wasn’t an uphill battle in terms of usability and performance.

Decentralized messaging and communications are more compatible with the first principles of the internet.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#28

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 2:25 PM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #4

cies wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason for the initial development of "the internet" as we know it, basically TCP/IP, was know as the Department of Defense (DoD) model because the research and development were funded by the United States Department of Defense through DARPA. The idea was to build a network that --unlike pre-existing networks-- did not need centralization. The goal was to make the network resilient to parts not working, with obvi…

This is a different type of centralisation, though. WhatsApp isn't running out of a single data centre (I hope).

>This is a different type of centralisation, though

Not really. There's a single entity that controls WhatsApp and so the entire service can be stopped by threatening/sabotaging that single entity.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#29

Post by Yeul » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 2:37 PM UTC

mycall wrote: post #27

Underpass9041 wrote: post #2

I’m not entirely sure why it matters that silos of messaging data exist, if it’s encrypted like Signal and WhatsApp the centralized model is far superior to an arbitrary and unknown number of parties receiving metadata about messaging. It might have been an easier case to make if Matrix wasn’t an uphill battle in terms of usability and performance.

Decentralized messaging and communications are more compatible with the first principles of the internet.

The real principles have always been a US dominated and controlled internet. The only ones who ever understood that and didn't sign up to Pax Americana are the Chinese who are building their own internet.

Re: US Senators implore Department of Defense to expand the use of Matrix

#30

Post by solarkraft » Thu, Dec 05, 2024, 3:27 PM UTC

Matrix has pretty good government buy-in at this point, I just wish it was, well … nicely usable. It has been getting better, but is maybe about 80% there.

I keep preaching that it needs to be easier to build a client (encryption of course not being optional). The spec keeps changing (for the better, but the changes are often breaking), so the maintenance burden is high. This means only the biggest of libraries are really good picks. Highest on my wish list are currently JavaScript bindings for the Rust SDK.