patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,260,075 comments by 15,047 users - Blue, TheDonald online now
invite responseComments 1 - 6 of 6 Search these comments
1
Patrick
2021 Feb 11, 7:47pm
Patrick
2021 Feb 11, 7:47pm
Huh, @richwicks I think you're right about Tox, looks good, peer to peer messaging and groups. Maybe I need a patrick.net group on there somehow.
tovarichpeter mentioned it here in 2014 but I didn't notice.
tovarichpeter mentioned it here in 2014 but I didn't notice.
3
Patrick
2021 Feb 11, 7:51pm
Patrick
2021 Feb 11, 7:51pm
If you find someone's old post or comment and you want to try to bring them back, you can click "like" on it. They will get an email if their email address is still valid and they haven't clicked "no" to getting those emails.
5
richwicks
2021 Feb 11, 8:02pm
richwicks
2021 Feb 11, 8:02pm
@Patrick - Tox has some problems, but I'm gearing up to work on it to fix it. It's unstable on transferring files and there's tremendous over-head. It was written by a bunch of college students or people that just threw it together. It's kind of a mess - no offense to the people that worked on it.
I'm reading up on the IPFS (interplanetary file system) to see if it REALLY can replace a website. I'm not clear if it even uses a traditional webserver to work.
Didn't know about Jami and Briar. I'll have to look into them as well.
Furthermore, anything that has a server - that means a man in the middle attack is possible. So, anything that has a server AND encryption - assume it's not encrypted. Skype used to be point to point, and no server, but when MS bought them, they made it so it HAD to use a server. This increases cost, and requires support for a bunch of servers, AND slows down the communication - and why would any company do this? The only reason is so that messages can be intercepted. And trust me, that is why MS did it..
So if you want any HOPE of security, you have Jami, Tox, and Briar. Tox is the only one I know well. It uses ECC for public/private keypairs, and some symmetric key thing (Salsa for tox maybe?). Not certain how secure the NaCL library is (seriously, it's the SALT library), but I trust it over a lot of crap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaCl_(software)
I've worked with openssl, I consider that a rat's nest of software. They have made FUNDAMENTAL "mistakes" in coding it, like buffer overflows. I don't consider that secure at all.
I'm reading up on the IPFS (interplanetary file system) to see if it REALLY can replace a website. I'm not clear if it even uses a traditional webserver to work.
Didn't know about Jami and Briar. I'll have to look into them as well.
Furthermore, anything that has a server - that means a man in the middle attack is possible. So, anything that has a server AND encryption - assume it's not encrypted. Skype used to be point to point, and no server, but when MS bought them, they made it so it HAD to use a server. This increases cost, and requires support for a bunch of servers, AND slows down the communication - and why would any company do this? The only reason is so that messages can be intercepted. And trust me, that is why MS did it..
So if you want any HOPE of security, you have Jami, Tox, and Briar. Tox is the only one I know well. It uses ECC for public/private keypairs, and some symmetric key thing (Salsa for tox maybe?). Not certain how secure the NaCL library is (seriously, it's the SALT library), but I trust it over a lot of crap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NaCl_(software)
I've worked with openssl, I consider that a rat's nest of software. They have made FUNDAMENTAL "mistakes" in coding it, like buffer overflows. I don't consider that secure at all.
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/tox/