3 ms·

What useability tradeoffs? If you don't care if your chats are in plain text, then you shouldn't care if they are encrypted.

mgraczyk 5y ago
If my chats are encrypted and FB doesn't have the private key, I can't send messages from my desktop without either 1. my phone is on and does a secure key exchange each time I login on desktop, in which case I have to carefully audit complex novel crypto or trust that FB doesn't snoop the key during the exchange. or 2. I have to scan some QR code or some other bullshit to make desktop chat work. And more importantly, it's possible for me to lose my message history if I lose all my devices. I don't want any of these.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Or 3, use a time- and memory-hard key derivation algorithm that generates your private key from a password that is never sent to the server.
  - mgraczyk 5y ago
    And if a user forgets the password, all their messages are gone! Also, requiring that users memorize another password is a pretty huge UX burden. Remember that FB has billions of users, so we're talking about mostly non saavy users. No popular E2EE messaging service that does this as far as I'm aware.
- bostonsre 5y ago
  > 1. my phone is on and does a secure key exchange each time I login on desktop, in which case I have to carefully audit complex novel crypto or trust that FB doesn't snoop the key during the exchange. This isn't a usability tradeoff, is it? If you don't care that your messages are in clear text, then I don't see why you would then be forced to audit how their crypto works to be sure that it works so that you could then use that crypto for messaging. I don't audit how my web browser uses ssl, do you? > 2. I have to scan some QR code or some other bullshit to make desktop chat work. > And more importantly, it's possible for me to lose my message history if I lose all my devices. Yea, these do seem like potential usability issues and I could see these being valid reasons for them not wanting to roll it out. That being said, they are facebook and they have a ridiculous amount of engineering talent to apply. I would be really curious to know why they think they can solve the problem well it in a few years but not in a shorter time frame or if they don't think they can achieve it in a few years and are just kicking the can down the road in the hope that everyone forgets about the can later.
hunter2_ 5y ago
I've begun using E2EE on FB Messenger and these are the tradeoffs I've noticed: - Photos don't pinch-to-zoom - No read-receipt indicators - No reactions besides the primary emoji - Primary emoji can't be changed - No nicknames or other frills ...none of which have anything to do with E2EE itself. Feels like MVP issues, to be honest.

mgraczyk 5y ago

If my chats are encrypted and FB doesn't have the private key, I can't send messages from my desktop without either 1. my phone is on and does a secure key exchange each time I login on desktop, in which case I have to carefully audit complex novel crypto or trust that FB doesn't snoop the key during the exchange. or 2. I have to scan some QR code or some other bullshit to make desktop chat work. And more importantly, it's possible for me to lose my message history if I lose all my devices. I don't want any of these.

nitrogen 5y ago
Or 3, use a time- and memory-hard key derivation algorithm that generates your private key from a password that is never sent to the server.
- mgraczyk 5y ago
  And if a user forgets the password, all their messages are gone! Also, requiring that users memorize another password is a pretty huge UX burden. Remember that FB has billions of users, so we're talking about mostly non saavy users. No popular E2EE messaging service that does this as far as I'm aware.
bostonsre 5y ago
> 1. my phone is on and does a secure key exchange each time I login on desktop, in which case I have to carefully audit complex novel crypto or trust that FB doesn't snoop the key during the exchange. This isn't a usability tradeoff, is it? If you don't care that your messages are in clear text, then I don't see why you would then be forced to audit how their crypto works to be sure that it works so that you could then use that crypto for messaging. I don't audit how my web browser uses ssl, do you? > 2. I have to scan some QR code or some other bullshit to make desktop chat work. > And more importantly, it's possible for me to lose my message history if I lose all my devices. Yea, these do seem like potential usability issues and I could see these being valid reasons for them not wanting to roll it out. That being said, they are facebook and they have a ridiculous amount of engineering talent to apply. I would be really curious to know why they think they can solve the problem well it in a few years but not in a shorter time frame or if they don't think they can achieve it in a few years and are just kicking the can down the road in the hope that everyone forgets about the can later.

hunter2_ 5y ago

I've begun using E2EE on FB Messenger and these are the tradeoffs I've noticed: - Photos don't pinch-to-zoom - No read-receipt indicators - No reactions besides the primary emoji - Primary emoji can't be changed - No nicknames or other frills ...none of which have anything to do with E2EE itself. Feels like MVP issues, to be honest.