3 ms·

Definitely suggesting the method is secure, assuming the company does all the things they’ll say they do, which I also agree they’ll do. I’m just concerned the

by mortar 2y ago

Definitely suggesting the method is secure, assuming the company does all the things they’ll say they do, which I also agree they’ll do. I’m just concerned the government can destroy this all, just by compelling them not to, and change a well intentioned method at any moment.

echoangle 2y ago
But what would the government compel them to do? If the method is secure, you don’t need to trust the server. And if they backdoor the open source client, people could notice it in an audit.
- mortar 2y ago
  The method is secure until they change it. Their docs mention that generating a token is not anonymous, but using a token is. Considering they already know who generated it, it could be trivial for them (to change something server side where the validation occurs, if compelled) to link a particular search to a user.
  - echoangle 2y ago
    You don’t get the token itself from the server though, you get something so you can make your own token for which the server doesn’t know who created it. So they can do whatever they like on the server, they can’t identify you.
    - mortar 2y ago
      Indeed, thanks for clearing that up!
- mortar 2y ago
  I think you’re right, perhaps I’ll do some more reading about it - It seems like it all relies on what the extension does, and if this extension is open source someone will notice as you said. Thanks for the clarity!