5 ms·

And why would I want interoperable messenging apps? That will essentially place an upper bound on features. Interoperability on messaging, that includes ByteDan

And why would I want interoperable messenging apps? That will essentially place an upper bound on features. Interoperability on messaging, that includes ByteDance, is a ban on end to end encryption.

malermeister 3y ago
Why would that be a ban on e2e?
- martin8412 3y ago
  Because ByteDance is Chinese. China doesn't allow for end to end encryption without at the very least a backdoor. By mandating interoperability with ByteDance, that's effectively a ban on E2E. The other messaging apps can't have secure E2E when it needs to be compatible with the compromised model of ByteDance. If they make it secure, it's in violation of the DMA rules on interoperability.
  - throwawaymobule 3y ago
    For messages you send to users of bytedance apps, sure. I don't see how it would affect anything going on in non-backdoored apps.
  - malermeister 3y ago
    As far as I know, ByteDance is actually incorporated in the Cayman Islands!
  - littlecranky67 3y ago
    This is easily fixable by ByteDance only supporting API access / E2E for non-chinese users.
tiltowait 3y ago
Interoperability just doesn't seem possible/practical—not without hurting all apps involved. Hopefully I'm just pessimistic.
- ThatPlayer 3y ago
  I don't think you're being pessimistic if you think all apps must match features. But it does mean you're not aware of the text of the law. The law defines a basic feature set: text messages, sharing images and videos, that must be interoperable. Group chats get added after 2 years of gatekeeper status. Voice/video calls after 4. Any features other than those do not have to be interoperable. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1925#007.002 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...
paxys 3y ago
It is up to you to decide whether you want to chat with a ByteDance user or not. The rest of the ecosystem can still stay as secure as it is today.
ThatPlayer 3y ago
It doesn't require apps to be fully interoperable. It only requires a basic feature set: text messages and image, file, video sharing. Group chats are not required for 2 years, and video or voice calls in 4 years [0]. Any features outside of that don't have to be interoperable. As for E2E encryption, I think Matrix has done a good write-up on this [1]. Also right after the interoperable section [0] is where the DMA says E2EE "shall be preserved across the interoperable services." [0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1925#007.002 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... [1] https://matrix.org/blog/2022/03/29/how-do-you-implement-interoperability-in-a-dma-world/ https://matrix.org/blog/2022/03/29/how-do-you-implement-inte...
littlecranky67 3y ago
The featureset is pretty much all I need. If I look at Telegram, they do hava an open-source protocol and their clients are interoperable - and feature wise, Telegram has been ahead of WA for a long time.

And why would I want interoperable messenging apps? That will essentially place an upper bound on features. Interoperability on messaging, that includes ByteDance, is a ban on end to end encryption.

malermeister 3y ago

Why would that be a ban on e2e?

martin8412 3y ago
Because ByteDance is Chinese. China doesn't allow for end to end encryption without at the very least a backdoor. By mandating interoperability with ByteDance, that's effectively a ban on E2E. The other messaging apps can't have secure E2E when it needs to be compatible with the compromised model of ByteDance. If they make it secure, it's in violation of the DMA rules on interoperability.
- throwawaymobule 3y ago
  For messages you send to users of bytedance apps, sure. I don't see how it would affect anything going on in non-backdoored apps.
- malermeister 3y ago
  As far as I know, ByteDance is actually incorporated in the Cayman Islands!
- littlecranky67 3y ago
  This is easily fixable by ByteDance only supporting API access / E2E for non-chinese users.

tiltowait 3y ago

Interoperability just doesn't seem possible/practical—not without hurting all apps involved. Hopefully I'm just pessimistic.

ThatPlayer 3y ago
I don't think you're being pessimistic if you think all apps must match features. But it does mean you're not aware of the text of the law. The law defines a basic feature set: text messages, sharing images and videos, that must be interoperable. Group chats get added after 2 years of gatekeeper status. Voice/video calls after 4. Any features other than those do not have to be interoperable. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1925#007.002 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

paxys 3y ago

It is up to you to decide whether you want to chat with a ByteDance user or not. The rest of the ecosystem can still stay as secure as it is today.

ThatPlayer 3y ago

It doesn't require apps to be fully interoperable. It only requires a basic feature set: text messages and image, file, video sharing. Group chats are not required for 2 years, and video or voice calls in 4 years [0]. Any features outside of that don't have to be interoperable. As for E2E encryption, I think Matrix has done a good write-up on this [1]. Also right after the interoperable section [0] is where the DMA says E2EE "shall be preserved across the interoperable services." [0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R1925#007.002 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... [1] https://matrix.org/blog/2022/03/29/how-do-you-implement-interoperability-in-a-dma-world/ https://matrix.org/blog/2022/03/29/how-do-you-implement-inte...

littlecranky67 3y ago

The featureset is pretty much all I need. If I look at Telegram, they do hava an open-source protocol and their clients are interoperable - and feature wise, Telegram has been ahead of WA for a long time.