Live data from Hacker News

Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

titus-stahl.de

31–40 of 178 posts

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Riot is most comparable to Slack or Discord. It has chat rooms. It supports voice, image posts, file transfer, etc. It stores conversation history. You can private message people. Matrix is a generalized protocol for decentralized and federated communications; it's agnostic to the application layer provided by Riot. Something Matrix doesn't have, but is on the issue backlog, is support for email-esque thread contexts…

Discord/slack isn't federated, is it?

no

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#32
post #9

This topic has been beaten to death on HN over the last year (other people can provide links to discussions, with Moxie participating). I think something worth keeping in mind is that almost everyone who works in secure messaging agrees on one thing: that electronic mail is not the future of secure communication. There's no fundamental reason why that should be the case. The store-and-forward model used by SMTP could…

"non-federated" and "secure" in the same sentence is a joke. Signal's other problem is Google Play Services which has absolutely no place in a supposedly secure system.

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#33
post #9

This topic has been beaten to death on HN over the last year (other people can provide links to discussions, with Moxie participating). I think something worth keeping in mind is that almost everyone who works in secure messaging agrees on one thing: that electronic mail is not the future of secure communication. There's no fundamental reason why that should be the case. The store-and-forward model used by SMTP could…

If browsers are able to deprecate old encryption layers I don't see a reason why matrix client wouldn't be able to do the same. And as with browsers, if the clients or servers don't get upgraded then at some point they will stop working.

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

End-to-end encryption. Even if you encrypt email with PGP, which no one has come up with a satisfactorily easy interface for, it leaks a lot of metadata. Riot gives essentially the same privacy guarantees as Signal, but with email-like federation.

PGP can be used to encrypt at the ends, in which case it is end-to-end encryption. So that's not a different feature. Care to share what you mean by PGP leaks a lot of metadata? You might be right, I'm just not aware of such details.

PGP encrypts the contents of the message, but not the headers.

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

End-to-end encryption. Even if you encrypt email with PGP, which no one has come up with a satisfactorily easy interface for, it leaks a lot of metadata. Riot gives essentially the same privacy guarantees as Signal, but with email-like federation.

PGP can be used to encrypt at the ends, in which case it is end-to-end encryption. So that's not a different feature. Care to share what you mean by PGP leaks a lot of metadata? You might be right, I'm just not aware of such details.

None of the email headers are protected in any way for a PGP-encrypted email. All the same metadata is that collected from plaintext email is still available on "encrypted" email. You literally can only protect the body of the email. In surveillance, that is often the least interesting or valuable piece of information.

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#37
> The most important concern is that Signal is a silo [...] you have to connect to OpenWhisperSystems servers to communicate with other users.

You can run your own private Signal service with OpenWhisperSystems' tools [1].

It's also worth noting that Signal - as a protocol - could easily be federated. (As others have mentioned, Moxie has chimed in on why the app is centralized [2]).

If confederated messaging is important, why not use the existing Signal protocol implementations, (including the X3DH key exchange, ratcheting protocol, etc), which is all F/LOSS, and has already been widely reviewed (as the article mentions)?

[1] https://github.com/WhisperSystems/libsignal-service-java

[2] https://whispersystems.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

Re: Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

#40
post #9

This topic has been beaten to death on HN over the last year (other people can provide links to discussions, with Moxie participating). I think something worth keeping in mind is that almost everyone who works in secure messaging agrees on one thing: that electronic mail is not the future of secure communication. There's no fundamental reason why that should be the case. The store-and-forward model used by SMTP could…

"non-federated" and "secure" in the same sentence is a joke. Signal's other problem is Google Play Services which has absolutely no place in a supposedly secure system.

Signal's use of GCM has also been beaten to death: it's a platform issue that has no impact on security (but does make it harder to deploy Signal on nonstandard Android platforms).
Post reply on HN