3 ms·

"The problem" with lists like these is that they proliferate without reason. This fragmentation means that it's basically impossible for anybody who needs one t

"The problem" with lists like these is that they proliferate without reason. This fragmentation means that it's basically impossible for anybody who needs one to know which ones are good or up to date. It also guarantees that most of them will be unmaintained at any given time. Somebody should make a list of lists. Or a list of lists of lists... > - Off-The-Record: Doesn't cover group chats or other side channels, such as status updates, VOIP. ... and yet it's still the ONLY cross-messenger system, not everybody uses group chats, and not everybody cares about status updates or whatever. > PGP: NO. It has no forward secrecy, it's a terrible way to encrypt real time communication. That's not what it's for, and email is not "real time communication". I have an archive of email going back 30 years. Forward secrecy is not always a win. > Tox + qTox: Developed wrong. They developed the software then decided to write the spec afterwards. Many of the projects you recommend don't even have specs. Tox may be a hot mess, but it's not unusual in that regard. > Browser Extensions: NO JUST NO. That's an awfully strong statement to make without a threat model... > Video Platforms: These are not private ... but you list "social networks", which are intrinsically "not private" in their very purpose, just like video sharing... Etc.

dngray 5y ago
> ... and yet it's still the ONLY cross-messenger system, not everybody uses group chats, and not everybody cares about status updates or whatever. There is Matrix. The issue is that people don't know what actions are E2EE and what is not. > That's not what it's for, and email is not "real time communication". I have an archive of email going back 30 years. Forward secrecy is not always a win. It was listed under the "encrypted messaging" section. > That's an awfully strong statement to make without a threat model... It's not, its that browsers have evolved to the point where a lot of those extensions are unessary and actually are counter to privacy, modifying your fingerprint to be unique. > ... but you list "social networks", which are intrinsically "not private" in their very purpose, just like video sharing... As it happens we're removing those sections for this very reason https://github.com/privacyguides/privacyguides.org/discussions/949 https://github.com/privacyguides/privacyguides.org/discussio...
dngray 5y ago
> just like video sharing The difference with our video sharing section, is we primarily focus on clients which store data on the device https://www.privacyguides.org/video-streaming/ https://www.privacyguides.org/video-streaming/

dngray 5y ago

> ... and yet it's still the ONLY cross-messenger system, not everybody uses group chats, and not everybody cares about status updates or whatever. There is Matrix. The issue is that people don't know what actions are E2EE and what is not. > That's not what it's for, and email is not "real time communication". I have an archive of email going back 30 years. Forward secrecy is not always a win. It was listed under the "encrypted messaging" section. > That's an awfully strong statement to make without a threat model... It's not, its that browsers have evolved to the point where a lot of those extensions are unessary and actually are counter to privacy, modifying your fingerprint to be unique. > ... but you list "social networks", which are intrinsically "not private" in their very purpose, just like video sharing... As it happens we're removing those sections for this very reason https://github.com/privacyguides/privacyguides.org/discussions/949 https://github.com/privacyguides/privacyguides.org/discussio...

dngray 5y ago

> just like video sharing The difference with our video sharing section, is we primarily focus on clients which store data on the device https://www.privacyguides.org/video-streaming/ https://www.privacyguides.org/video-streaming/