why not exchange "proper" keys when both parties are first both online? messaging that does not let me send messages to offline peers is quite useless in many cases. I would much prefe
Tox: secure messaging for everyone
61–70 of 214 posts
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
DH wasn't designed for forward secrecy.
True, my usage of designed was a little bit liberal here. Mr. Diffie is one of the authors of the first paper to introduce the concept of PFS, but the DH key exchange algorithm hasn't been designed for PFS but rather for 0-knowledge key exchange. Nevertheless, I stand by my remark regarding the pertinence of DH in that case.
DH is also not a zero-knowledge key exchange algorithm. I think what's confusing you is that DH (a) is a useful building block for forward-secret protocols and (b) generates secrets that often require zero-knowledge proofs.
I'm not sure what paper you're referring to but wouldn't be surprised if Diffie's name was on one of the first "forward secrecy" papers; that stuff is/was kind of Whit Diffie's beat (not "privacy" per se, but the higher-layer implications of public key cryptosystems). But Diffie-Hellman predates any formalized notion of forward secrecy by something like 20 years.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#63Oh, I see you helped yourselves to my Secure Chat logo - http://dribbble.com/shots/479881-Secure-Chat http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288 https://www.google.ca/search?q=secure+chat+logo - first page hit too Not cool at all, "cool guys around the world". -- (edit) Regardless of whether this was copied, over-inspired or independently conceived (but let's be realistic here), the generally accepted rule of the game…
Honestly, I don't see the concept being so unique and original that someone else couldn't have come up with it independently, and frankly the Tox logo has a much nicer balance (in the Tox logo, the person/keyhole works much better, whereas in yours it doesn't really work as a "keyhole" in my opinion) than the versions you linked. EDIT: The logo was originally made in /gd/ (4chan's graphic design board), and since the…
Strong disagree. That was a clever logo and one I hadn't seen before.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#64Unconvinced. * Lossless UDP? Is there a reason not to do TCP? * There is no way to know if the public key is genuine, so the system is very sensitive to MITM. * The key exchange is inadequate. Why not do DH if it's just to have session keys? * The system is very easy to brute force as the acknowledgement is based on a known plain text. This is very bad . A quick glance at https://github.com/irungentoo/ProjectTox-Core…
>Lossless UDP? Is there a reason not to do TCP? Hole punching. >There is no way to know if the public key is genuine, so the system is very sensitive to MITM. If you want to add someone you need their public key (their id) which is 32bytes (It's small because we use ECC instead of RSA). Unless someone somehow replaces the key (your id) when you give it to your friend the system should be secure. >The key exchange is…
Thanks for that. I saw a post on some chan, quickly browsed the source and thought you'd just exchange public keys via unauthed connection.
The reply does make sense, so I'll take a look at the source again and check your answers.
You should have posted this at the chans, where I voiced some similar objections.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I don't see the concept being so unique and original that someone else couldn't have come up with it independently, and frankly the Tox logo has a much nicer balance (in the Tox logo, the person/keyhole works much better, whereas in yours it doesn't really work as a "keyhole" in my opinion) than the versions you linked. EDIT: The logo was originally made in /gd/ (4chan's graphic design board), and since the…
Strong disagree. That was a clever logo and one I hadn't seen before.
Whether or not you "strongly disagree" doesn't change the fact that it was created independently by other people as well, evidenced by the third comment in one of the links latitude posted (http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288) and in archived threads where multiple people came to the current design on 4chan's /gd/ that Daiz posted.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#66"...application that allows you to connect with friends and loved ones."
...who know what to do next after they click the 'download' button and are forwarded to a GitHub page. I'd like to give the app a try, but I look at that page and I don't know where to start.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strong disagree. That was a clever logo and one I hadn't seen before.
Whether or not you "strongly disagree" doesn't change the fact that it was created independently by other people as well, evidenced by the third comment in one of the links latitude posted ( http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288 ) and in archived threads where multiple people came to the current design on 4chan's /gd/ that Daiz posted.
I'm not invested in this issue enough to argue about it. I look at a lot of systems like this and was struck by the novelty of the logo, is why I commented. Take that for whatever you think it's worth.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#68Since you managed to kill the website: https://github.com/irungentoo/ProjectTox-Core Tox is a completely decentralized secure messaging service which aims to replace skype. It it still in heavy development. So far we have IM working almost perfectly but no completed GUI yet except for a basic ncurses interface used to test the core. For the detailed info on how everything works see: https://github.com/irungentoo/Proj…
Hey, congrats on the hard work. I'm going to try it out. Is there a bird's-eye-view on how you have made it secure?
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#69Oh, I see you helped yourselves to my Secure Chat logo - http://dribbble.com/shots/479881-Secure-Chat http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288 https://www.google.ca/search?q=secure+chat+logo - first page hit too Not cool at all, "cool guys around the world". -- (edit) Regardless of whether this was copied, over-inspired or independently conceived (but let's be realistic here), the generally accepted rule of the game…
Your logo is not very good. You're upset because someone had the same idea as you, and they did it better. That's understandable, but not a reason for them to change it.
Re: Tox: secure messaging for everyone
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strong disagree. That was a clever logo and one I hadn't seen before.
Whether or not you "strongly disagree" doesn't change the fact that it was created independently by other people as well, evidenced by the third comment in one of the links latitude posted ( http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/165288 ) and in archived threads where multiple people came to the current design on 4chan's /gd/ that Daiz posted.
As I said in the (edit) of the original comment, the originality is secondary to the timing.
When you finalize a logo, you typically run a quick due diligence (a Google search) to see if you reinvented a wheel. If you did, you scrape it and start afresh. Tox didn't do that and they should've.