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

Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

ghostcall.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#41

Post by john8675309 »

patcon wrote: post #6

Hm. I'm not sure I get it. (from the Google cache) > Q: Can I call any number I want? > A: No. Ghost Call can only call other Ghost Call numbers. > Q: How can we contact you? > A: You can email us at info@ghostcall.io, or Ghost Call us: (490)-628-2381 So it's a ZRTP SIP provider that uses regular phone number format as the identifier? It strikes me as rather much like OSTN/OSTel, but using a phone-number-looking iden…

So the project was built for a hobby, I wanted an encrypted phone service. But I wanted every aspect of it to be encrypted, from the signaling to the RTP. I wanted to make sure that no unencrypted client could connect to the platform. I would be interested in peering with oslec though.

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#42

Post by themartorana »

jfmercer wrote: post #32
xbryanx wrote: post #13

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I used to use this quote all the time too...until I realized it originally meant something entirely different. http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/how-the-world-butchered-ben...

It never ceases to amaze me how much the mythology surrounding the Founding Fathers really boils down to taxation.

Because all they knew of taxation was theft of the poor to line the pockets of the rich with no true benefit coming from taxes paid (other than avoiding prison).

Sound familiar?

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#43

Post by john8675309 »

iaw wrote: post #21
dataker wrote: post #19

> A:During the beta period logs are kept for 24 hours, once beta is complete there will be no call log records. Is there a particular reason to do so during their beta?

Not associated with Ghost Call but my expectation is that they'd use the logs for debugging major bugs during the beta period. Kind of hard to identify and reproduce transient issues without those logs.

You hit it on the head. I am not interesting in anything but calls not working. After that I have no need or want for the data.

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#44

Post by john8675309 »

0x006A wrote: post #11

how does it compare to OSTN/OSTel ( https://ostel.co/ )

I have never personally used the service, but the design from the ground up on ghost call is encryption, using all open source phones/etc (I think ostel does this as well) I also wanted to prevent any unencrypted client from connecting either intentionally or by misconfiguration.

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#45

Post by john8675309 »

kseistrup wrote: post #10
patcon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

presumably the country code + phone number is your username... but I can't see the tutorial videos while the site is struggling

I've tried both with and without the country code, but the SIP client fails to register. The server could be overloaded, tough — perhaps I should try again tomorrow.

Make sure you are using TLS, it will always fail if you don't have TLS on (port 5061)

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#46

Post by jessriedel »

afarrell wrote: post #34
jessriedel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it means something entirely different. At most, Franklin and the other founding fathers had a more expansive notion of liberty than is now common. Both the sanctity of private property and the right to privacy are aspects of that sort of liberty.

Is private property really still sanctified when so much of our wealth has come from robbery, slavery, and rents extracted under intimidation? Strong property rights are very useful to a healthy economy, but sanctified?

The standard reply here is that none of those bad foundations is a good justification for someone else (e.g. your neighbor, your homeowner's association, or the state government) to take your stuff, unless they can actually show that whose stuff it ought to be.

If I could hypothetically follow the "chain of legitimacy" for, say, your car all the way back to the original exertion of labor on natural resources...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_property

...I'd likely find some sort of illegal activity at some point. But this doesn't mean I can take your car by force and give it charity.

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#47

Post by slg »

jessriedel wrote: post #40
slg wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem is the quote is now used to set up a false dichotomy between safety and liberty when it was originally more about balancing short and long term priorities. Franklin was simply making a quip about the legislature considering the deal from the Penn family. He meant something along the lines of "people who give up their rights to self governance for temporary safety don't deserve either to govern the…

I still don't see the problem. It is a well known argument that liberties are tend to ratchet down (never up), so that any time you give up your liberties for some new threat (say, terrorism) you are making a short-term/long-term trade off. The biggest difference was just the Franklin was talking about self-governance rather than individual civil liberties, both these are obviously closely connected. I think your ver…

I think the idea that civil liberties always ratchet down is very debatable if not flat out wrong. The only people who were guaranteed civil liberties when Franklin said that quote were wealthy, white, heterosexual, protestant men. We have certainly improved things since then.

I am also not ready to categorize terrorism as a sort term issue. I don't foresee anyway the War On Terror ever really ends without us simply abandoning it. In my mind the modern argument should be more about the effectiveness of abridging civil liberties than about the temporary nature of the threat (which was one of the central points of Franklin's quote).

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#49

Post by aboutus »

olefoo wrote: post #35
andrewchambers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are confusing anonymity with something else. Bitcoin is entirely anonymous, but all transactions are public. You can create as many wallets and keys as you want, and you don't have to tell anyone you own them.

This only allows you to stay anonymous if you can get your money out of bitcoin anonymously. Whether by buying dollars/yen/whatever on an exchange or purchasing goods and services. And it's damn hard to buy a yacht anonymously regardless of the unit of account the transaction is done with.

The most important aspects of bitcoin is that it's decentralized (cannot be controlled by governments and banks) and inflation-proof.

It's not anonymous, but certainly more private than using a debit or credit card!

Re: Ghost Call – Secure, Encrypted, Anonymous Calling

#50

Post by andrewchambers »

olefoo wrote: post #35
andrewchambers wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are confusing anonymity with something else. Bitcoin is entirely anonymous, but all transactions are public. You can create as many wallets and keys as you want, and you don't have to tell anyone you own them.

This only allows you to stay anonymous if you can get your money out of bitcoin anonymously. Whether by buying dollars/yen/whatever on an exchange or purchasing goods and services. And it's damn hard to buy a yacht anonymously regardless of the unit of account the transaction is done with.

You can get bitcoin anonymously by mining. The weakness is in trading, even then, there are anonymous goods such as digital goods, and probably ways to perform anonymous escrow when trading real goods.

In practice, people don't care, because they aren't doing anything illegal.

Post reply on HN