Live data from Hacker News

Encrypted messengers: Riot, not Signal, is the future

titus-stahl.de

61–70 of 178 posts

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

#61

Does anyone know if they are planning to add a way to change home server. If they take your domain (With your Matrix server on it), you have no way of communicating with other people over riot anymore.

I believe you need to create a new account on another homeserver.

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

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GCM depends on Play Services, so I'm really not.

GCM is merely one minor component. The existence of the microg project proves that you can implement one without the other.

MicroG does not implement GCM.

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

#63
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The developers have feature justifications for every permission requested: https://support.whispersystems.org/hc/en-us/articles/2125358... Edit: Reading your link now, as I didn't see it before I made my comment. Was that added in as an edit?

These are the justifications of developers who are unfamiliar with the Intent system. Were I unaware of Intent, I would make the same design decisions.

Correct. Someone should point the Signal developers to the following pages:

https://developer.android.com/training/contacts-provider/mod...

https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/calenda...

and so on and so forth for almost any permission the Signal app needs on Android.

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

#64
post #54
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can also affect security depending on what jurisdiction the servers fall under. Federation means that while it may be illegal to run the service in, say, China, it can be run elsewhere without those concerns. This is becoming more apparent with the widespread use of National Security Letters.

Sorry, am I missing something? It's my understanding that Signal is ETE encrypted. All an NSL would get you is ciphertext and metadata.

The scenario I'm imagining is that Google and OWS receive NSLs requiring them to push a modified APK that could do nefarious things.

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

#65
post #6

I have the impression that Signal by now has such a great brand name that mere technical objections won't affect its growth for a very long time.

I wonder if the name of Riot will be a hindrance for widespread adoption. Most people don't like riots.

Or the fact that searching for it usually results in the company riot behind league of legends.

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

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GCM is merely one minor component. The existence of the microg project proves that you can implement one without the other.

MicroG does not implement GCM.

MicroG does implement the GCM client! I've been getting push notifications through that thing for several months.

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

#67
post #57

> 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 impor…

> You can run your own private Signal service A distinction without a difference. I use Signal because people use Signal. People do not use 'the Signal service'. They use OWS's app and OWS's servers and moxie has explained he will not federate. The fact that OWS goes to all the effort of creating this excellent protocol, and then insists on only deploying it to insecure devices (with direct-memory-access baseband rad…

I'm not a fan of opaque baseband firmwares either, don't get me wrong, but what's the alternative? Not for the DoD, I mean for union organizers making $50k a year -- people who aren't going to get murdered by Mossad, but still need to authenticate and encrypt their communication channels. What device would you recommend?

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

#68
post #6

I have the impression that Signal by now has such a great brand name that mere technical objections won't affect its growth for a very long time.

I wonder if the name of Riot will be a hindrance for widespread adoption. Most people don't like riots.

I actually just learned today that Riot (the IM app) is not related to Riot (makers of hugely popular video game League of Legends). I thought the occasional mentions I was seeing of "Riot chat" meant that LoL's mobile chat client was gaining traction among people who don't play the game.

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

#69
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically? There's nothing stopping them. For that matter, there's no stopping Google from doing the same. There's also no stopping Apple from patching LLVM so that only patched versions of OpenSSL are ever compiled against. The question is how paranoid are you and what is your threat model? We have to trust someone, eventually. This is especially true for the 99% of the population who doesn't have the skill to com…

Just in case nobody has gotten to enjoy this gem: http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack Ken describes how he injected a virus into a compiler. Not only did his compiler know it was compiling the login function and inject a backdoor, but it also knew when it was compiling itself and injected the backdoor generator into the compiler it was creating. The source code for the compiler thereafter contains no evidence of e…

Which is why standardization is just as important, if not moreso, than openness in making sure things stay secure. Such an attack is made a lot more difficult if you have a second toolchain you can use to verify things, and even moreso if you have a third.

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

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MicroG does not implement GCM.

MicroG does implement the GCM client! I've been getting push notifications through that thing for several months.

Through Google, yes, but you can't bring along your own push notification delivery service.
Post reply on HN