[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/tech/ - Technology

"Technology reveals the active relation of man to nature"
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord
ReturnCatalogBottom

File: 1621049915255.png ( 19.62 KB , 1200x630 , 1621021893932.png )

 No.8483

Another honeypot takes its mask off.
>>

 No.8484

Only telegram remains standing
>inb4 autism
>>

 No.8485

File: 1621052528628.jpg ( 73.83 KB , 712x720 , 1567963732024.jpg )

>>8484
You mean XMPP and Matrix.

>>inb4 autism
>>

 No.8486

Only iMessage remains standing
>inb4 autistic alternatives
>>

 No.8487

>>8484
>>8486
>posts shittier alternatives even compared to signal before it went glowie
>>

 No.8488

>>8487
iMessage is better than everything mentioned here so far
>>

 No.8489

File: 1621056082648.mp4 ( 7.67 MB , 1280x720 , Glowie_3.mp4 )

>>8487
>implying it wasn't glowie already
>>

 No.8493

>>8483
Are you referencing a news story or something OP? Some context would help.
>>

 No.8506

>>8493
This. What is glowy about it?
>>

 No.8507

Why is Signal glowie now?
>>

 No.8515

>>8506
>>8507
>Why is Signal glowie
requires phone#
server is NSA'd
moxie

>>8485
briar is also breppy gud. chews battery like a mf tho
>>

 No.8521

Matrix, XMPP, Briar.
>>

 No.8529

Signal servers are proprietary. They have been for over a year, there's no way to verify if the Signal service is using the server code they push to github.
Signal will integrate a shady "cryptocurrency". It won't an actual cryptocurrency since it's pre-mined, centralized and fully controlled by Signal.
Signal developers have always either made false promises or refused to listen to users to improve their software. They refused to move to the Matrix protocol which would have improved their scalability and openness. They refused to abandon SIM card (phone number) requirement to register to their services. They actively fight against Signal forks.
>>

 No.8544

>>8483
I gave up and just started using whatasapp
I cannot take the isolation, I want to COOOOOOONECT

Mashalllh forgive me but I may even make an instagram account

COVID WAS MADE BY MARK ZUCKERBERG TO MAKE ME BITE THE DUST AND GIVE THEM MY DATA
>>

 No.8545

>>8488
but we android users can't use it :(
>>

 No.8546

>>8545
why would you use a Java phone anyway?
>>

 No.8551

>>8546
because it's cheaper than an iphone but has more features than a basic phone
>>

 No.8563

>>8544
>instagram
https://barinsta.austinhuang.me/en/latest/
>>

 No.8564

>>8515
>server is NSA'd
>moxie
what does this mean
>>

 No.8581

>>8563
NOICE
>>

 No.8590

>>8551
old-gen iPhones like SE are pretty cheap nowadays for a first-worlder
>>

 No.8634

>>8515
>server is NSA'd
end to end encryption

>>8515
>requires phone#
you can purchase a prepaid burner phone for $10. You could get a free burner number from TextNow. You have no excuse.

>>8529
>Signal servers are proprietary.
End to end encryption. Messages are encrypted in the OSS clientside.

>>8545
>>8488
iMessage client is proprietary, is it not?

>>8544
>went back to whatsapp
>proceeds to complain about mark fuckerberg
You know that Facebook owns whatsapp, right?

Anyway, @ everyone here: you should use to use anything with verifiable end-to-end encryption if you are messaging your comrades or terror cell or whatever goofy shit you're involved in but unless you are using the tor version of this site, what's the use in complaining?
>>

 No.8635

>>8564
>>8515
>>8529
>>8529
>Signal servers are proprietary. They have been for over a year, there's no way to verify if the Signal service is using the server code they push to github.
What difference does it make if the Signal servers are proprietary if all messages are end-to-end encrypted? The client is open source. The mechanism for encrypting messages is open source. We can clearly see that the messages are getting encrypted. Open source server software is a meme in your own words because you *cannot* verify that the server is actually running that exact software, deltas and diffs and all. So, basically, it's a non-issue.
>>

 No.8647

>>8564
i guess they think NSA watches the connections
which, considering they can watch basically the whole internet, isnt wrong?
i dont know any evidence that any bad actors have server access directly. If they did, most bad that could happen is they see who is texting who.
If they're watching both ends, they can try to correlate who is texting who, with more difficulty
>>

 No.8650

whatsapp is also end to end encrypted, is it as safe as signal too?
>>

 No.8651

>>8647
>i dont know any evidence that any bad actors have server access directly. If they did, most bad that could happen is they see who is texting who.
<moxie
He is clearly implying Moxie is the bad actor.
I am on the fence about this itself so not going to defend the assertation but lets not just pretend that is not what is being made.
>>

 No.8672

>>8650
no
>>8651
i didnt notice that
from what i hear, moxie is honest and is just kind of a possessive retard
in some ways shit like centralization makes sense, and as long as it's open source (it is), then all that a malicious server gets you is creating social nets. Which is huge if you're using it as an activist but for most people it just tells them stupid shit they already know
use xmpp+omemo over tor for your terrorist cell
>>

 No.8692

>>8650
Nobody knows whats in WhatsApp (it's closed source) and I don't trust Facebook.
>>8672
This. Signal is a replacement for the SMS function on your phone. It's good at what it does, but it doesn't hide who you are messaging from the NSA.
>use xmpp+omemo over tor
This will still leave you open to correlation attacks. The NSA probably can't do it with today's technology, but the possibility is there. What we need is something that adds a delay between hops in the onion network. If mixminion gets developed, it will be the ideal messaging platform.
>>

 No.8697

>>8634
>end to end encryption
signal is still not metadata resistant last time I checked. glowies don't necessarily care about plaintext

>you can purchase a prepaid burner phone for $10. You could get a free burner number from TextNow. You have no excuse.
nice try moxie

e2e is a meme. it's fucking useless if 1) the spooks can just install a backdoored client on your device 2) if they have access to your phone book 3) if they have access to the server, since they can see who is messaging who

>>8651
I'm not necessarily saying moxie is a bad actor per se, just that as a US subject we can't trust anything he says because he's almost certainly NSL'd

>>8650
whatsapp is zucked, don't trust it

>>8692
>What we need is something that adds a delay between hops in the onion network
I2P does this if memory serves me right
>>

 No.8699

>>8697
>I2P does this if memory serves me right
It doesn't and it can't. Tor, I2P and any other low-latency network is vulnerable to correlation attacks. The only way to get around this is to add a random delay after a node receives packets to when it sends them (but this adds latency.) Otherwise an adversary can look at packets going in and packets going out and tell who is sending to who.

Tor and I2P do try to obfuscate, such as reordering packets and using fixed "cell" sizes. The adversary sees something like 1 KB go in, 1 KB go in, 1 KB go out, 1 KB go out. They don't know which of the 1 KB in the input went to which output. Over a long enough period, it may still be possible to correlate the packets going in and out to deanonymize you.

This is why mixmaster nodes add random delays between receiving and sending messages. It can take up to 48 hours for the message to get through, so people won't use it for web browsing, like they do with Tor.
>>

 No.8700

>>8699
I thought i2p's "garlic routing" did something like this, but I guess I was mistaken

how do you feel about gnunet? among other things, it transmits chaff. this increases bandwidth use, but should be helpful if I understand things correctly
>>

 No.8701

just dont use a phone
>>

 No.8702

>>8700
>how do you feel about gnunet? among other things, it transmits chaff.
GNUnet is very ambitious and will be good if they pull it off. It has been in development for a long time. Tor doesn't transmit chaff, but if packets are too small, it still transmits the same cell size of 512 bytes.
>>

 No.8703

>>8483
what happened?
>>

 No.8708

File: 1621742510948.jpeg ( 32.05 KB , 559x360 , get_NYM!.jpeg )

>>8692
>>

 No.8721

>>8635
>What difference does it make if the Signal servers are proprietary if all messages are end-to-end encrypted?
The NSA collects encrypted data which it can't yet break in the hopes of breaking the code in the future.
>>

 No.8726

File: 1621749494952.gif ( 20.79 KB , 800x661 , troll.gif )

>>8721
generate true random data, like from atomic decay, send it over the internet, have the NSA scratch their heads why they can't break the encryption for all eternity.
>>

 No.8729

>>8726
The NSA doesn't try breaking encryption so much as it builds social nets. It's impossible to decrypt any of the widely used algorithms right now. There may be problems with the software implementations of algorithms that they can hack, but that's a crapshoot for the NSA.

We can still feed them bullshit social net information. Computers randomly sending packets to one another will confuse the fuck out of the NSA.
>>

 No.8731

File: 1621769270814.gif ( 495.71 KB , 320x178 , the game.gif )

>>8726
>NSA manage to decrypt it anyway
>CIA arrests you
>CIA decrypts the messages again with a wrench just to make sure
>>

 No.8733

>>8729
You have a point about randomizing the social net too, good call
>>8731
>NSA manage to decrypt it anyway
They can't decrypt random noise you moron, there's nothing to decrypt, the joke was that you can't be sure about whether a file is noise or just encrypted and compressed really well. If they hold on to a file just in case they can decrypt it later, they will be holding on to noise forever. It might even allow for a saturation defense that defeats bulk surveillance because they have to filter out noise if people make enough to saturate their system and that would change surveillance from bulk back to targeted.
>>

 No.8734

File: 1621778988414.gif ( 1.31 MB , 390x252 , 776[1].gif )

>>8733
>>

 No.8742

There's a project called Session that is closer to what Signal should be (no phone number, proper desktop option, not centralized). However, it is built around Lokinet, which I think is a Tor fork with some additional gimmicks like torrenting and live streaming. This network is built around some cryptocoin that is a wannabe Monero (hosting a node pays you in this coin). So it is a little fishy; maybe it could be forked to use proper Tor?
>>

 No.8759

>>8742
is it better than briar?
>>

 No.8763

wait what happened?
>>

 No.9177

>>8742
What are you suspicious about? The concept you just laid out sounds highly solid to me. Paying people to host a node sounds like a wonderful idea in terms of keeping a network uncompromised?
>>

 No.9182

>>8742
>This network is built around some cryptocoin

ugh no thanks
>>

 No.9343

https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issuecomment-217211165
Remember when Marlinspike got his panties in a bunch over someone making a version of signal that doesn't need google?

Unique IPs: 28
[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome